51 vw;. t M. "Ma - Olt Ta non 07ý Ann,!"ýn- nod A "AM W SAO 0ý Vi QQI ýv73: TRADANSPORTATION ---LIBRAýRY.. A R TES SGTE N-TI A V.E R ITA's "-, ý ýý ý ý ýý 'r, ý'i, -;,, ý,,,' I 1,, I i t.,.111;ý::::Oxw --, - ": ý I-, - "ý --- - "A"! ý ýý I * I- ý"" ýrý I "I, ý " f--.; 4-T ýýZ.ý,,ýil,ý,ýý-. -M '.',-,ý!M,ý-,'-ý-`ýý7 -41, - xin *qý-,ý., ý, - ý ---, I - - - "1%11"1--Z-e---1111,- - 'r, -,-`-ý-,! 'i 17-, - -..,,, - k -! ý,,ý---, ý-, I. ý ý, - W 1.1igg,... ý... - ý., - ý., -11 týý - 1,17.1.7 -;ýý " ZJý 1'1'ý--ý,., -_ý,.'-`,,ý,'t--ý,-, -,, -;A ý, ý.-,- `ý', A -1 -,ý,,, ý, --ý1`1ý1 ý` -tg - ý., 0 -ýý ",ý.ýx,ý!:ýW, -7, ý1 - -,,.S, I -,ýý,:ýý, "., - I -,-, 1ý ý " ý1 't I,, - -ý -;, 11 IF -,, -,-,;';ýý' z:.- ",., - ý'. ý ý,-- ý, `ý -7 ` -0 - 't `,, ',-ri-n ý, 'Id ý.-"-- -,,,,u---ý,, -. _e0l" --, " 51 IS ',,a.'ý. - )P' W- 1,?,!,,;ý,ý,, v, -., k,. P,, ý--.--iý -.- I.1 ý 7. " ý I ýý, -;, - -:1.1 ý - * ý1, "..,; `- 7,; k- I:11, I, ". - - 'I -,5--ý,:4 - ý-,,,..ý ý I ý, I -, -1 ý., -,, -- `7.; -ýý,ýý,, "'L-q ýý: '1ý4 - - -?,ý, 2ý'c -, 7, ".,, ". k, a) tý.--. - - ý - A -,ýý_,.-,,ir k. 1,,,ý?ý-, ý.ý, -,ý5-,&,.ý'ý,-& - " 1 1 A -11, Q 1 -.9,T Q A 1-L ýý -, 0, V; %ýa ý - 1 1-1 1. 1ý., ". P v in' -', 0 " i I - 'I -,--2,..,,-,,,, ý ". "- ý -,, C. -,.;; I I ýý,;ý. -ý,,.1 - -, -:ý;. %,. ý.,ý ý, 47,X). -, -,7 ' -, "j, ý,,,,,'ý, "-',,_fýý --, ", ýý ----ý, - - ':,' A,,-, 0 -- ýý ý,, ý -. ýi,ý/ -1 --- -1- --., --ý,',ý -11.,g, -,,,ý,;-'--,,ý"".,.'jý 1',-,ýý-;1.11,..'T ': ý-,v ý 1)", --.-' ".., "I ý', -':" ý ý,,ý n, ýý,- - - v. 60 - X,ý,, -ý - I 4., I ý') " ýýW ý ý,. ýA, -2ý, ", '* -, ý - -, - -. I,, -. ý'-,ý, - - * I - _, -, `5ýý 1ý.-. ':-",,ý ---,9,- -.1, 1ý,:,:" I ý 1 - JA M 2 1. I,--, -,, --,z - --;ý,--ý,, f,. I, ý',, ý, -,-:ýý -- -,,ý-Aý,5 Y, -, %, " -ý,ýý týý, - - -ý, -i- " -ýý.. - -ý I ý1, -`", ý ý. ý Fg,,ý', " 'J" -., -,.3 -ýý,:L I I, I,ý,, i,, " 1, - - - " ý, ýý', ýý, ý 7ý, -ý,, Cý;, ý 4.,,, NEQ.: 2 m ý,. - - - - -,,-, -, -- ý. ý, ý ". ý ":ý ý -ý ýv ý., 40 6-ý',5*,,," 7..;..,,, ý,-.-'e, ý.-. I 4. 7 ýý,,-,`-ý! ý.1',,-", I.-:-2-, ý 2,!-ý -.,, -,, - -- ý -,,, -.. 4, -, 1z ý, j.ý, -.: `ý;ý -,!ý -.- ý, J I,ý,`i-,ZL','ýý'-,--ý,--ýý "',, ý, -1 - - ýý, ý - ý - *1 - 1-M V., " e ":., &.'y 'ý7,: ý',ý -1 -- 1: 0 11ý,.q, - 1-ý'ý ý-%,, -f - -- -,ý ý. ý ( ý,--;.,r, 11ý'-, ýý, "., - -, - -, 1, ý ý-'-' ý,;..ý-, -, ---,ýiý-ý,:-.", I, I,..,:,: U, I d, '-,,- -ý.., -, 1-4, z i, It IK OR 7 - Lin..1,. " -,ý;-,-- - ý, ý:,. If I - --;ý, * '- 41,'ý- "; 1, t f ý111 - ý. -1" ý-ý`,I ý-`-,. -, I,, ý ý --,!ý,','11ý',. - '-;v " v " -ý ý!, -,' ý -ý -ý --- ý 11 -ýý-7- ý".ý-;.1 -ý, I ý%'-,ý-ýt, -4ýý'.. ý L,,, ý:,i j':- -7ý,-.,,,,, t.., -., -,,,,ý-,,,ý,ý.- ý " -,, ý q ý. -;ý(ý ýý,ý'i, ý;N Q 1 ",&.,,, -4, -r I,- -, 1;ý q, -`ý-: ý,- --; ----" ý -11 -,,*ýý!,ký-,!,-,ý,.,,,, > ý ".,? ý X--,, I m ý - o - -.,.,-' -k,!:_4W_ 0- r-,-ý - -- i" ý -.1ý, - 11 -,,ý ý,, )., ý,, '. ý:, ý! `ý-,- -ý,-"`-,,ýý ý - ý,;,;-:,,ý, - ý --,, -1 -,, - -, '-i-;,-," - - ", f;,ý--.;, -,r,.. ý,,- - -- - - ý, j;,, 1, 2-ýý, ý. --ý - - ý, V. -i -ý? -, -ý,,;,ý ---,ý'Aw.. -,,, "'-- iiýý- -1, ý, Ký I Nýl -1-11.1ý, ý,,ý '. I ý.,,.ýý. -ý-,-ýý F ',ýý.ý, '.,:,'ý', 1ý. -:;:-, ý -, -ý - A, 'ýt4.), -ý;,,ýVtfý,; 4 _'.,I' -"ý I -,. - - -, - - - -.ý.-ý, I -.,^ " --s- - - In, -ý-, - T,,I d A 1A., -ýý.." "...,., ý -1-1ý ý.."",-.."-ýl-lý,ý,,ýý,,,-,;-,,,,,ý, e -L, ý.- t. ý, ". - %,, -, -, - f." ý ` ROA N " 4ý r 11.1, I, ". tý,, -,:, ", ýý:ý - -ý. ý,.,.,,,-..ý, - ý, 46m, - -,, 1ýý - -:ý,,.",,,- -.ý, I * - - ý, `;1 -- k1-,, -g x -ý >, - - " 1 - - - 7 1 ýý' 1 --,, -, -ýý. Y, " - -- - 0 =- I "Y"',-;tý - ^,,P,,, ý ý.c -." M"" ý ý ''. -, ý ýý-.'ý, 4'ý -;,,ýýý.,.: 1.,ý,-, " ý,^, ý, A -ýi_-,7, i.'f - -, - ý,. ý; I 11 -1 " -.,- ( --ý,:,. W N - I ý M ý - t, -- -, ý -, 'ý- --, ý. ý, ý, ý,.,:, --,., ". ý - - "",-;;-,;, ý........: - fyj -A -, - A - An -- - ý.,.,, - ",,, I, ý. -, ý`, -.rL - - A r - - - ý ý, -.ý,ý,, - pni, ýýd, --,ý.;ýýOa% --t4ý -- ý,-` ý(-ý " ".. -,, " -, - ý.., 1, ý,.-ý- ý, --- -, - ý - ý -,;f,1, ",.;..,. ýý, - - _ N - I W, -f - ý ý,-', ýý -;ý, iN W l- 11 -I ý ý -, -, jUqu, 1 "",ý, _0 I.. au Nor -1 "-it';...... ý, - ý--Z:,-2-1" hvw 'I, - ý - ý ý'-ý:, 2ý I,, -,, - -ý% 4,1ýý,-, - ý -z- I - -,-r. -.: -,ý,, -,,ý '.,7ý 1 "L Y ý'-' ýý ýý `ý, - ý ^. t "....14 ýr%.11, - _, j" A!ý I "..,. 1-,"t -,,e- - - - 1 0 ",ýVjmzh ý-- - -;Z - 1ý I. ), ý;"L:,ý ý- _,ý, ý -,. --. --1-1 ý, --., ý,`ýý--ýý-.-ý ýý -6ý,. ýý,,; - ).1 ý *--,ý,1%1:01 - -,ý4.::ý,'--;ýZýz-..;ý,,,. ý -.,. _ ý, ý "M y -I % - I- ý-, -ý,--,ý',. " -,,:ý-,- -.- - ý,,. I ýý-.--"-..'-, ý 11 -,7:-,.,1,-.1.ý-,:ý4Fýzj, ý ",, ýý- - -q -, I. _.5,! "4, %-- ý ~', Ný I W, ý- psi,,:,,. - ý ý., - ": " - -:-ý. -,? "., -,,,, ý,:ý 4- ý` i ý- 1, ---ý, ý _-, ý,- --, ý -`ý,ý, -ý::ý ý:;-- _, ( -:-. ý, -; -ý -.,ý-,ý, f, ý,,:k:-, -) jýý - - aki", ý,V "...,.,.,..,-.,. -,..,.,,Y-, 1 -,.*...-,. ýý-,-.,, -,ý-;,ý "... -- W.;ý ý, ';, "--,,,- ý -': - 1 W ý ý I. ý., - I... "I ý ý., - I - -,.,, e, - - A, 1. ý,. - -.,, ý:, - ýý..., I, ":ý:-;ý. - -, 1 ý, i K- C O. -- A,v jjv,j ý",-, " 46.ý -., ý'.. -- - - -, '.,-.' ",7ý--_,A,,,ý - ý, f/ " ",, - I.K j!W"I 41 yr, ",,,.,,;ý, It S,*, -,-."v ý-, ý,ý,.,.'--',-:,* -,-ý ";.,. - -, - 4,ý, 1ý. ý, 11 - -,,,,, -., -..,.1. ýj 'ý-*, I ý, I -ý, ý - p '. `ý`ýý,ý,:, -,,, 0ýtr '; ý-:ýý,. I -., ý, 11ý I, 1". -,,, - ýý ý - -ýý 41ý I.,,., 7,,-,'iýý.. 4k.ý 1,, -., - - <,, -- 1---ý - -, ý ý. ý ý:! ý ý I..:-,-, --ýý,-- -,'',",-,ý,. ý 1.. " ---'- ----ý- 1,,"I I, ý, "., ý ý 0 -, -,,. ý ý, ("ýtý, ': -, ý:. - -., - ", _:,,...,,, -1--,,.,..... "I 'I, - --ýý', ":', ý., - -ý. ý, - 1ý., -ýý*'11!ý, ý':, -,, ý -, -... 11 "I'll,. ý,..,;ý,ý. ý - -,', -ý. -, I -ý`."ý,,ý, - ýý":,ýý, ý,,, I. - - - I,. - --; ý - ý '. - -,,, -- -ý- ý -- -_ ` 11 - -- -;ý - ý-,,_::,.,. -,,-ý - -. ýý,. 1 1.,,.. \ m* - I I/'.', ý,;,I -. Cf, - - I ý' - ", - ý: ý, -, -,--,,,ý -ý iý ýý ý - I ýý-z - -,- - -.ý,-,ýý ---,,-,,- ý-.f.- sv -, -,ý., ý, -, -:-_-ý.,. ý-- ý 11,111", -,ý`,:ý " -; ýý -'' ý -,. -,;,.. -- 1. ý ý" " 1- -.1, ý- - 1. ---, j It, ý IVý. - ý-- I ý 1ý -1 '.. -- -,ýý-' -1 'L - -, 'ýW t'.,a;-, *,,:ý.,_; -, I ý -- t;ý ý ý,,,.,'ý,ý,.. -, " -ý-, -, ý - -,!ýfl -; - -,ý.. ýý ý,ý,,- 1. 1ý:. " -:" -,.,7-, ý ý:ýý,,--. -ýý ýý,`:ý- ý.., - ----ý-, -1-, 11 -,ý ". - I -ý ", ý, - ýý ý --- '-I,-,ý.tý, ý,- ý -.., ý-ýý-.-A j::ý:ý* '. r-,W 1ý:, - týi:,-,ý: ýoý 1: A.,:, ý,, ý--,." ý.,.., I - 0, ---v- --Al ý - jý ý.,., -1ýý. ý,,;.w'ýý;,!ý:ý -ý,., - ý:ý ý' `. ý i,. -, I. 5,,'I - --.?, -ý_,, ý- -.,- "',, -... - -!: ý215iýý-.-; -- '.. _-ý - ý!" 12ý.-. - -; f - ý!., 1ý ",, -:, - - 'ý- - "-'-;ýýjf.-!"' 'ý,ý' `p,, ý.,::ýý f ý C ý,, -.-,, - I -,ýL --ý,,;.D i,, -ýý*,' -ý - - - -7, t 2W al m y"v ", ý17-? ý - -1 -,7:7ýý,ý,--,, ý I -,,'.,. -_ý,, -j ýý---- 1--ýZ,,ý,--; -, ý,;",k.1 j"AV",ý"" 196ý ý I W, - -,, ý,,ý `ý - " ý - - -ý 1, ", 1. ý ý_ ý,, - - - -, -ý,,, -ý -. -ý ". - '. ',.. ý,,,- ".1 _. ý, - 1 --. ý-` ýý`; J, ',- ",., - " - I --- r.-., -ý, - --.m --,ýý,:- ý 4 -; -""... "..ýý,ý-,,ýý, -!, ý,ý',,ý Nf,, -ý--. ý ý -!,,ý..'ý, -,ý, - ý, I.,.,-.ý, ý ý,: ýýi. ".., ýý,ý " -. p ý ý..1-Z;---,--,,-,"--.,-t, ýý,` ý`ý ýk, "c "..-, - I ýý -,. " -%" - 2 - 4,`ý`,, 'ý. -.., ---, --.-ý:,,ý-, ý,.ý', - "."I'g -, ýý - ý -,"ý. ý -- " ý,.ý - I I. I -, " - - - 1i ý,ýý, _., _, ', _" ý; --,, --,-,4'.--,ý' ---ý,;-,,ý.;, 'ý,, -. v.;:, I., ( -,, " ý. ý - I -,.ý< I. - 1rA;:ýý,, -v,, --ý,ý,',-ý--,,(,ý ". -ý, ý,.:, ý., 4. f,.fý - v ý L I..-1'-'-111-`,. 1i.-N,. tý ý,-ý - ý., ý, e,--. L, ý, --,2 Q, W ',, "I,"), ýý --ý,ý, ý', - --, i-', ý 1 -- ý. or " A"Ar. ý - ", -e. --, - ý ý,. - - Zý --ý, _.",- " - 11 1; -, -,ý i- ý -'- 1ý11-. -- -W. ýZý: -, I. ý., - 1ý'Vý.-, - *,.,.,.:ý,,..Iý, - ý1,,, - ýZ`,,,K,ý I o,ý,, - Z- I.-.ýý, " 11, -ý - -;:ý,---, Aý ý-,. --ý- -ý-.-,ý--ýý: f'ý,'i---, ý,, ý I.ý;.-ý,-;,ý I.j - 7",, A _u 0- 1 f.;.,ýý`,, - - - - -. " - -,ý ýý ý " 1ý1.,, ý,, ": ".,,,,,-iý,-.,:ýý,,.,,: - -,--.----, -, -,", ý ý!, L" ý,,ý'ý41ý;ý:,i)-,,ýý ýý,-ý-, -, 1 -, 'ý --, - - --ý.. - I ý f I -, -, - ý ý, -, ".-, -,., ý - ý i - -- Z:ý,- ý.-:. - oý -"-,ý.. ý - ZIP -..- -, '. ýi' - ý j,.,,, ":,, -- ý ý -, t Q,;ý ýý ý '. -.1., I 11. -,:ý, I - ý1,,ý I - -I -.,,,,, ý. - - - - ---:z --,-ýý-- - -;.,ý, --;-,ý:ý,ý:ý,,,--,,-- i - - 'tý---.` --:?ý,, 1,;,..) ý - -:, ý: ý ".1.1-11 ý, ý:'-!, --'" ý, -'? i"I ý P, " ý, -ý,,, -7 ý.' - - ý, ý,:-.-- 1: -,.ý..,,-ýý -,; ý"`-ý! -1,- ý ý-11- AT of 1;".iý ý,J, W, ý ",,:, " '' ý -,.. I -,,'--,,,,ýý "ý'--'ý ý,,- " -.:., -, ý.--ý'-' ý,.1-11 - -),.,;ý,ýý,:ý---`-v.'41 - " I ý -:_-_ --4 - 'ý I. - ý!,, - ý, - -,-,.,ý. I, I. --,,.. - '. -ýý,ý -,. - ý -,- --, -- - ý,-ý,:- -,,,ý, " - - -:-,ý..,ý: -`- -ýý,ý:ý f. ý,,ý- ý ---ý ý-, ý. ý!, -,,:7ýý ý,?.'ý,?,j, '! r,-ý -ýý, 01.1 ý ýy ".J.,..,,..--,,-,1ý-. -- -. - -t,?,, - ") c-4 -:--,,"',ý') ---':,,';,, ý - - 1-ý, I I ýýZ..1 );'-,ý, ý --'2:,;-:1ý-' C,)-,,. - -, -W.- Wj;Q,,,! " i,.., -,, _ ý, - A gc ý, Avony " -, -, -,ý4.,- ý.ý. ý 1 -M O. c u- ý-;ý -ý ý:,," ý - _;ý.,:; `-ý, -- ". ý - '-, ýL ',,, - v. Aý SO, ",,, - -.,., A4,, -, ý VM Aln O'L '. - -- - - ý, - -f,;,ý. - -,ý -,,,>. t., ý:... ý:-!", ".- `ý,,.,: *, z,ý; I ý.. - I, ":;: ý,. L 'I, ",,,,, -,,-,.Zk,;, 7-:, ý,,,,-Lýjý:ýý-.. ".c ý,,,. 'I ý ý - ý., --,.1,.-,,,, '. ",,ýi,, ý V A "M OY.ý,.,. ý,ý 4,11 1 - -ý,,"',-, g,,,-;,,... -.ýý-,-- "l-, `-ý,,,ý;"..;,-'-ý.": -ý--";t.,.. ý ý, -1- 11,ý-:ý-,, - 1, -.,', ". Q ý,'ý, -:.i-.- ýý -,ý'.. -.k.. ý '' -, - -, I - -,ý - ý.,. ý ý:-ý ý:- -;, "" ý e., - ý: -,;s, ý, % -,:ýý,-,-,ýZ.-.-,_ ý " '. 1ý ý ". -ý1ý1, -;`1 I " 1 1-1-4501 0 -,. -, W;', ý. -r__--- - %,,?ý, I'll..1,. ý ý(ý - ý, -,,., ý-.; -. I, - ý -- ý -, -ý-,ý4.,l Aý,','t'-,---.'-ý,ý- -:ý- ý,, _ -, I.ý - q ý ý,:,., -, - -, " ý -, - ýý ý'; ý " -.ý, I.,, I, ý-,,- -i, " -,. -,,,ýt. ý - -1 ý: ý:. - s o " ý -,,ý ý,ý ýt'; " -ý,,ý.:,, ý..,.. ý.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ýý:ýýý:ýýý:ýýý:ýýý:ýýý:ýýý:ýýý:ýýý:ýýý:ýýý:ýýý:ýýý:ýýý:ýýý:ýýý:ý ý::, - -ý '4ý,',,-7; -ýn 1, I,;;, ýý:ý,:" ý,' ", -,,-- -, ",- "ýI',, "' - ý -, " ý i! -:., ".': ': " ýý, -,. 1ý," ý ý ý,, '-', ýý:ý., ý,; )", -, -, ý -.ý...", ý, -,, - ý ", ý,,, -.ý ý. - ý - - - - -, ýý:ý, -, ý I I ý,_,_,. - _ýý -- -, - ýý. ýý:ý *-,, ý,,ý,, ý -, ýý- - -, -ý, -- V- - ý, '-:... W w "Z, ý: ýý,-.:,.,-,,-, - - ý- I,.%,,,-ý, ý,,, -... -, - -11",... t - -- - -,, M -v a -- I:ý., ',,'-,,, - - -,: ý-,:,-,ý;- ". - ýý -.,,:; ýý. -ý, - -I-:,.- I,:,: ý n" -, ý,,--;ý!,ý I ý -, - -,-:. ý 'ý;,ý, ý-,-,.'-ý, ý:,ýý, ýý " " -ý ý ý,,;ý - A - -ý, `:ý:ý;" ý I -:, ý,ý,,, -, "I A, ( i v ý ý ý:;--,*-ý-'ý,-,-ý- W.11 - ýý,!*. 1..... I ý 4-, - '... -, 11 "'i., - -;ýý ý, ý'ý" )"r-11-7, "', " " I ) ':',-.,--P ý,, - 1, - - _ ý - ý I ýýý- -- - -, - ",,, ý I.'--ý*, ýý-,-. ý -.-.: I - - -.,., -., ý,,, - ". -.ý I- A, -, ý ý- - '-," - - -,ý:::ý ý.; ý- - I, - 2ý- ý, i ý ý, Z4 - "' ' ' ' ý-, -, P', - --; of,. ýý-. no -N in.0 " ý- -ý.:,: - L - - ý -m--'V - _:ý-- -I - ---,.;;;;;. I I, - " ".7, - ý-, -,: ý!., " ý ý-ý, ý '.,."' " Q:JL, ý - I,. --...,;. ý,, ý: ` -ý, 4NE70190-",, ý -.1 I - (, ýý a, 0....., yy vjp jýý - -, - _ ý.Z ",,,. ý. ý: -,.. -, -. i -ý -- K IN ý,L),ý- ý; -,, I ý " 4 _ Q,, 1 1..,;. 5, ý. -. ýý ý-," ýt--,- -,.,--,ýý,,,- I,Zý.*"..,1ý ý.ýýp, ý -. iý! ýý111`. - I ýý -, ", -, " '-.-ýJl L, -ý_ 1.ý"., - - *'ý',ý, '.. ýý.,. ý'..,ýý., " ý. -,;,ý I.,,, -.111, ý, ý ý, ý, 1.ý:ý7:. ", ý..: ý--", " -,, I:,,.,;, *,, I,ý ýý 'ýý,,,',.;-,-,-- 1ý','L, -1, ---. ý '-,, -, -. -, - 1,. `, ".?.-,:-ý-_,, 1.ý.' ý.. ý.- _. ý,,,"-,,':ý, ý,, ý -,-ý,ý, " -,- z,ý I. ý!: I, '3 ---, " ---ýý-ýý-! -,ý -,-,ý ",,-ý,ýý ý Z.,ý ` ý,., -,. - --ýý - - ý ',,Y,,-,,..--, - ý,,:. - -, - ", - I, I - ý,,: ý,:,, ýý- -ý- -- `-ý,: - -- I -., -..: -ý 1ý. I,- I.I., -,ý* ý ýý,, ",'ý- -,--ý,--.,,ý,.-: ý L - --- "., _,.,._: ýý,, ý 14 t I I I,, ý, ýý','.'.-'rý ".1, --,----.,, I 1, 1, -..ý - -:ý:::.- ý ý, -, ", -1--1-,, -,, ý, -,- - -, -. ý, ý - I 1ý,;ý".ý -,, ý ýý- ý I I" 1.: - " -ý -,, -, ý'ýý -ýý,, -, - - 1, -ý-4Eý, _,;ý - -,, -. -., ". - -,,. I. I 1-1 -, -- - ý,;.ý '1-,ý -ý - ýý,;ý,.ý.ý -,, -ý--.:: C`-;;ý- - -,;ý--ý/,-,. - -,; ý - -, - -ýý. ý,:-:,ý ý. ý, --jj!S',ý-',,- - -ý: F 1. -. -.: ý - - ý -,, ý, - - - - -, -,':ýý -I' - --, I, -1 - - ý ý!*' ý,, *- i - `ý- -1- -:t,Z -,, -! - - --., I ý--,ý, -,,ý,;-",,! ý.,,ý-,- -, -- - -..,, --"i.. k --,-ý -ý '--!-;ýZý;"---.,ý,_.- - - ý,,ý, ý,:ý I i 1ý I 'I, -,;, -,, ý,,,,,,, ý,.,ý ýý-, -., I., 1-ý, -, - - A, L,_ý; ý I ý ýý."'j- ý ý - ý;,, ý ýý- ý --I -ý ----,ý.ý,, - ý -: Zýý,--,ý--", A -ý--ý:',-ý.,,,:,ý---,ý -. ",(. t - " -ýý.:.::",." - -,.,, - -., ýý -, f, -,%,. -,,-ýý -, ý.,,-, 1.6",, -ý,z - --.,"- ý,-ý);.;-,;'ý',j - - - - - -, -,ý ý,;.ý', " 1. -'. ý, ý- - -.:, I-i"I'l, ý. I.,,, -., -Y. -ý" - - t-. ý,ý-. ý ý, -, ý' ý, -.. ý -..--: -.,.ý `ý-,'.;ý. 1:ý:ýrl I li,, -, ý:,ý,; - 1"..." -,,--- ý ýi,--, '.,. j - - I. -,; -,.ý, I - I.. -I - -,, - tý -, -ýý-,, ý -, ",, i, - -:, ý ý, -- I.;"-:;"- * i- ~ ~ t un Engineering Series Monograph Number One -4 -L REGIONAL PLAN OF NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS LEWIS REGIONAL PLAN OF NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS 130 EAST 22D STREET, NEW YORK Price, Two Dollars I S~ HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS ERRATA Page 55, Table V-U. S. Registration figures should be in the )llowing order: 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 5,104,000 6,140,000 7,530,000 9,177,000 10,464,000 12,239,000 Page 112, second paragraph, eighth line-" the three following ables" should read " the four following tables." Page 113, Table XVIII-Roadway width of 99th Avenue hould read "40" instead of "45." x rr Q t~r Cr~ ~u g u ~-. rJ Ct h 9 o u 13 -r: A, 0 Er (U3 C CQf C6 4- - -Cj C Cd ri) U CI C~d C 0 C ~~ ~r Engineering Series Monograph Number One REGIONAL PLAN OF NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS INCLUDING A PROGRAM, BY NELSON P. LEWIS, FOR A STUDY OF ALL COMMUNICATION FACILITIES WITHIN THE AREA By HAROLD M. LEWIS In collaboration with ERNEST P. GOODRICH REGIONAL PLAN OF NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS 130 EAST 22D STREET, NEW YORK 1925 Transportation ', REGIONAL PLAN OF NEW YORK,H AND ITS ENVIRONS Committee FREDERIC A. DELANO, Chairman ROBERT W. DE FOREST JOHN H. FINLEY JOHN M. GLENN DWIGHT W. MORROW FRANK L. POLK FREDERIC B. PRATT LAWSON PURDY General Director of Plans and Surveys THOMAS ADAMS ENGINEERING DIVISION _fdvisory Committee JAY DOWNER ARTHUR H. PRATT CHARLES W. LEAVITT A. M. REYNOLDS L. V. MORRIS MORRIS R. SHERRERD FREDERICK LAW OLMSTED DANIEL L. TURNER Tecznical Staff WILLIAM J. WILGUS, Consultant on Studies of Transportation and Port Development ERNEST P. GOODRICH, Consultant on Traffic Studies HAROLD M. LEWIS, Executive Engineer ALFRED CHANCHIK FREDERICK W. LOEDE, JR. HARRY H. HEMMINGS RAYMOND A. O'HARA - GEORGE A. SCHILLER " Copyright, 1925 COMMITTEE ON REGIONAL PLAN OF NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS FORE WORD This monograph embodies the result of studies made by the Committee on the Regional Plan for the purpose of obtaining data necessary to present a plan dealing linter alia with overcrowded traffic on highways as part of the problem of communication. The report does not enter into the discussion of proposals for relieving traffic congestion, but contains a statement and analysis of certain facts and tendencies of growth that have to be investigated before any plan is made. It also contains a summary of proposals put forward by public authorities. The studies of the whole problem of communication in the region that have been or are being made by the Committee follow the lines of the program set forth in the statement, prepared by the late Mr. Nelson P. Lewis, which forms the introduction to the monograph. Notwithstanding the close relation between the three parts of this problem, consisting of traffic, transit and transportation, it has been considered desirable to deal with some phases of the subject of traffic separately from the even more closely related subjects of transit and transportation. It is, of course, true that all three parts are interwoven in their operation and that the efficiency of each one depends largely on the efficiency of the others. It follows that what cramps or hampers movement in one part impairs the efficiency of other parts. The fact that this report deals with street traffic only does not arise from any lack of appreciation of the fact that the impediments from which it suffers are impediments to all and not merely to local means of communication. Although rapid transit has become a burning topic in New York and will tend to become even more so a-s the city expands further, upward and outward, the phase of the problem of communication that touches most interests and has most varied contacts with life and business is that of street traffic. This is because the city street is much more than a traffic way. In addition to the functions it performs as a highway in accommodating the movement of vehicles from place to place, the street is the right of way that affords access to and from all abutting buildings for all the purposes of business, residential use, policing, scavenging and fire protection;, it is also the public reservation within which are placed the services of water, gas, electricity and drainage that buildings require for purposes of use, health and- safety; and it is the space that insures, or should insure, to abutting buildings their principal and certain mneans of obtaining light and air. Where the property is residential, it is impossible to prevent children from playing on the streets. use of its frontage. A street that is both a main thoroughfare and a local business street may be more or less adequate for one or both of these purposes than one of the same width, depending upon the character and use of the adjoining property. Hence, we have to cease regarding streets as traffic ways only, and to recognize their relation to the building heights and densities in their neighborhood in order to get a proper understanding of the problems of street congestion and of the evils which it produces. The traffic problem in Manhattan, in particular, has reached a stage where more attention needs to be given to the relation of building uses, densities and heights to street space; and to the necessity of overcoming the difficulties created by the too numerous intersections. of main thoroughfares. Probably the only effective relief that can be obtained for the latter difficulties will consist in the separation of grades. Writing on this subject Mr. Frederic A. Delano, Chairman of the Committee on the Regional Plan, says: "In the large and congested cities of our country the traffic conditions have so developed, on the one hand by the creation of buildings of great height and bulk used or occupied by immense numbers of people, and on the other hand by the advent of the rapidly moving motor vehicle, that they cannot be dealt with by simple methods. The adequate widening of streets in congested areas involves in many cases an expenditure so great as to be prohibitive, and it is becoming more and more apparent to many students of the question that the ultimate solution of the problem of public safety on the streets, and of effective movement of traffic in areas of congestion, demands the more or less complete separation of grades as between crossing thoroughfares. "This solution, by the separation of grades between lines of traffic moving in large volume or at high speed, has long since been accepted as the only practicable method in dealing with railway traffic on busy lines, so that it is perhaps natural that the same solution should now be found to be required when dealing with cross currents of rapidly moving motor traffic. But, in the case of traffic in the streets, public safety requires that provision shall also be made for the safety of the pedestrian, and this can be done by the separation of grades as in no other way." While this monograph deals with those phases of the problem of communication that relate, more or less distinctively, to highways, it is not exhaustive even in this restricted sense. It has been found expedient to defer a full discussion of some phases, such as that of zoning in relation to highways, and the cause and extent of congestion in suburban areas, until the results of transit studies are presented. In future monographs proposals will be submitted for dealing with the problem of overcrowded highway conditions in the region. These will indicate what might be done to reduce overcrowding, and propose constructive measures aimed at preventing its recurrence in the'future. It is obviously desirable in the first instance to submit, as is done in this report, a statement of the underlying factors and causes, along with estimates of the tendencies of growth in relation to traffic congestion, before putting forward any plan for relief. Since the death of Mr. Nelson P. Lewis the work of preparing the data included in the report has been efficiently performed by Mr. Harold i. Lewis and his staff in consultation with Mr. Ernest P. Goodrich. The data are now submitted for discussion and as a basis for more extended study of traffic problems in the region. THOMAS ADAMS February, 1925 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE PROGRAM FOR A STUDY OF EXISTING FACILITIES FOR COMMUNICATION AND PLANS FOR THEIR IMPROVEMENT, by NELSON P. LEWIS........................... 17 MAPS AND DIAGRAMS ILLUSTRATING PHYSICAL CONDITIONS AND SYSTEM OF HIGHWAYS IN THE REGION........................................... 23 The Highway Traffic Problem in New York and Its Environs I. THE NATURE OF THE PROBLEM AND METHODS OF STUDY................. 36 II. MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION AND PRODUCTION...................... 39 1. Past Records,.U. S. A. and New York and Its Environs........... 39 2. Estimates of Future Growth................................. 41 New York City......................................... 42 New York and Its Environs................................ 49 Motor Vehicle Registration in 1965........................... 51 III. MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENTS........................................ 54 1. General Statistics............................................ 54 2. Between Street Cars and Vehicles or Pedestrians................... 56 3. At Railroad Grade Crossings.................................. 57 IV. CONGESTION RESULTING FROM PRESENT CONDITIONS................... 59 1. The Causes of Traffic Congestion and Importance of Their Removal 59 2. Cost of Congestion......................................... 60 3. Concentration in Central Part of the Area...................... 61 Persons............................................... 61 Vehicles...................................................63 V. THE RELATION OF MOTOR BUSES AND SURFACE TRANSIT LINES TO HIGHWAY TRAFFIC.......................................................... 69 VI. PERIODICAL VARIATION OF TRAFFIC................................. 74 1. Hourly Variation..............................................74 2. Daily Variation............................................ 74 3. Seasonal Variation.......................................... 77 VII. THEORETICAL STREET CAPACITY..................................... 80 VIII. LENGTH OF HAUL................................................87 IX. METHODS OF RELIEVING TRAFFIC CONGESTION........................ 92 1. By Regulation................................................. 92 Regulation of Traffic Movement.............................. 92 Parking Regulations....................................... 94 Segregation of Traffic...................................... 95 2. By Zoning..............................................:.. 97 3. By Physical Improvements.,.................................. 98 By-passing of Congested Areas............................... 98 Grade Separation.............................................. 98 Street Widenings........................................... 98 Arcading.............................................. 99 7 8 CONTENTS PAGE X. ESTIMATES OF FUTURE TRAFFIC......................................101 First M ethod............................................... o101 Second M ethod............................................. 101 Application of First'and Second Methods......................104 T hird M ethod.............................................. 105 XI. EXISTING AND PROPOSED FACILITIES COMPARED WITH FUTURE TRAFFIC DEMIANDS......................................................111 1. Lane Capacities................................................111 2. Main Arterial Routes in Suburban Areas........................112 Long Island................................................ 116 Staten Island............................................... 119 M etropolitan New Jersey.................................... 119 W estchester County........................................ 119 3. C entral A rea................................................. 119 XII. SUMMARY OF SOME OF THE MOST IMPORTANT HIGHWAY PROPOSALS FROM VARIOUS SOURCES................................................ 123 XIII. URGENT PROJECTS AND METHODS OF APPROACH TO FURTHER STUDIES.. 126 1. A Few Highway Projects of Urgent Importance....................126 2. Need of Co-operation........................................... 126 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS The Present Focal Point of Highway Traffic; Aeroplane View Looking across Manhattan Island and up Long Island Sound............... Frontispiece 1. General Topographic Conditions....................................... 25 2. Principal Im proved Roads............................................ 26 3. Trunk Line. H ighways................................................ 27 4. Theoretical Diagram of M ain Highways................................ 29 5. Relation of Highway System and Main Connecting Highways in the Larger D istrict............................................................ 31 6. Highway Traffic Census, 1922.......................................... 33 7. Annual Registration of United States Motor Vehicles, 1900 to 1923......... 39 8. Annual Production of Motor Vehicles in the United States, 1900 to 1923.... 39 9. Cumulative Motor Vehicle Production, Annual Registration and Number of Cars Scrapped in the United States, 1908 to 1923...................... 40 10. United States Classified Annual Production of Motor Trucks, 1918 to 1923. 41 11. Classified Annual Registration of Motor Vehicles in New York City, 1915 to 1923............................................................ 4 2 12. Population of New York and Its Environs, 1850 to 1920, with Estimates to. the Year 1965......................................................43 1.Population of Group I (New York City, Hudson County, New Jersey, and Newark, New Jersey), 1790 to 1920, wi'Th Estimates to the Year 1965......44 14. Variation of Number of Persons per Motor Vehicle in New York City, 1916 to 1935; Semi-logarithmic Scale....................................... 45 15. Variation of Number of Persons per Motor Vehicle in New York City, 1916 to 1935; Arithmetic Scale...............................................45 CONTENTS 9 PAGE 16. Variation of Number of Motor Vehicles per Thousand Persons in New York City, 1916 to 1935..............................................46 17. Actual and Estimated Motor Vehicle Registration in New York City, 1916 to 1935.........................................................47 18. Variation of Number of Persons per Motor Vehicle in New York and Its Environs, 1916 to 1935; Semi-logarithmic Scale....................... 48 19. Variation of Number of Persons per Motor Vehicle in New York and Its Environs, 1916 to 1935; Arithmetic Scale.............................. 48 20. Variation of Number of Motor Vehicles per Thousand Persons in New York and Its Environs, 1916 to 1935...................................... 49 21. Actual and Estimated Motor Vehicle Registration in New York and Its Environs, 1916 to 1935...........................................50 22. Number of Persons per Motor Vehicle by Counties, 1922, and as Assumed for 1965.........................................................52 23. Relation of Motor Vehicle Fatalities to Registration........................ 54 24. Automobile Fatalities in New York City, 1900 to 1924, with Estimates to 1928 56 25. Vehicular Accidents at Railroad Grade Crossings in New York and Its Environs during 1923......................................Facing 58 26. Views showing Streets and Sidewalks Blocked by Trucks Unloading at the Curb...................................................Facing 59 27. Views showing Provision for Unloading within the Property Lines... Facing 59 28. Diagram Showing Sources of Day Population of Manhattan South of 59th Street on a Typical Business Day in 1924........................... 61 29. Graphical Representation of Day Population of Manhattan South of 59th Street 62 30. Diagram Showing Ve~hicles Entering Manhattan South of 59th Street on a Typical Business Day in 1924...64 31. Distribution of Northbound Vehicular Traffic on Manhattan Avenues during a 12-hour Period as of January, 1923....................................65 32. Distribution of Southbound Vehicular Traffic on Manhattan Avenues during a 12-hour Period as of January, 1923................................. 65 33. Distribution of Northbound Vehicular Traffic on Manhattan Avenues during the Maximum Hour as of January, 1923.............................. 66 34. Distribution of Southbound Vehicular Traffic on Manhattan Avenues during the Maximum Hour as of January, 1923.............................. 66 35. Observed Relations between Volume and Speed of Vehicular Traffic on Typical Streets in Manhattan, October and November, 1924................. 67 36. Diagram Showing Comparison between Types of Surface Cars and Motor Buses Operating in New York City.................................. 70 37. Revenue Passengers Carried by Principal Trolley and Motor Bus Companies in New York and Its Environs.................................... 71 38. Diagram Showing Influence of Trolleys and Motor Buses on Distribution of Vehicular Traffic within a Street...................................72 39. Hourly Variation of Traffilc on Principal Roads in New York and Its Environs 74 40. Hourly Variation of Traffic on Avenues Crossing 42d Street, Borough of Manhattan....................................................75 41. Daily Variation of Traffic............................. 6 42. Seasonal Variation of Traffic..................................... 77 43. Distance Required to Stop Motor Vehicles at Various Speeds..............80 44. Observed Center to Center Spacing of Motor Vehicles at Various Speeds. 80 45. Diagram Showing Hourly Capacity of a Lane of Traffic for Uninterrupted Traffic 82 46. Diagram for Hourly Capacity of a Lane of Traffic for Interrupted Traffic. 83 10 CONTENTS PAGE 47. Traffic Discharge Diagram for a Single Lane of Vehicles.................. 84 48. Car Mile Capacity Diagram of a Single Lane of Traffic................... 85 49. A Photograph of One of the Observations used in Determining Vehicle Spacings.......................................................... 86 50. Length of Haul of Taxicabs in the Borough of Manhattan...............87 51. Length of Haul of Trucks in the Borough of Manhattan.................. 88 52. Length of Haul of Motor Vehicles in New York and Its Environs, based upon Counts made on the Perth Amboy, New Jersey-Tottenville, New York, Ferry........................................................ 89 53. Logarithmic Curves used in Deriving Formulae for Length of Haul of Motor Vehicles......................................................... 89 54. Suggested Method of Regulation on a Principal Avenue Restricted to Oneway Traffic.................................................. 93 55. Relation of Traffic to Registration of Motor Vehicles in New York City...... 102 56. Relation of Central Traffic to Registration based upon County Statistics... 103 57. Relation of Circumferential Traffic to Registration based upon County Statistics......................................................... 104 58. Estimated Ratio of 1965 to 1922 Traffic, by Counties, in New York and Its Environs..................................................... 105 59. Highway Traffic Census, New York and Its Environs, 1922................106 60. Estimated Highway Traffic, New York and Its Environs, 1965............107 61. Annual Variation of Vehicular Traffic on Certain Principal Routes, New York and Its Environs.................................................. 108 62. Vehicular Traffic Capacities of Existing and Proposed Arterial Highways to and from the Metropolitan District.................................114,115 63. Vehicular Traffic Capacities on North and South Avenues, Borough of Manhattan, New York City.......................................... 120 64. Highway System in New York and Its Environs................... Facing 122 65. Typical Cross-sections of Arterial Roads and Boulevards............Facing 124 66. View and Cross-section at Typical Point on Bronx River Parkway... Facing 125 CONTENTS 1 11 TABLES IN TEXT PA GE I. Motor Vehicle Registration in New York City by Boroughs, 1919 to 1923 41 II. Number of Motor Vehicles in New York and Its Environs, 1916 to 1923 42 11I. Motor Vehicle Registration in New York and Its Environs and Number of Persons per Motor Vehicle, 1916 to 1923, with Estimates to the Year 1935................................................... 51 IV. Number of Persons per Motor Vehicle, 1922, and as Estimated for 1965 52 V. Relation between Automobile Fatalities and Motor Vehicle Registration 55 VI. Number of Vehicles Struck by Surface Cars in New York City, by Months, 1914 to 1923 inclusive.................................. 57 VII. Number of Persons Struck by Surface Cars in New York City, by Months, 1914 to 1923 inclusive......................................... 57 VIII. Persons Killed or Injured in Grade Crossing Accidents in New York City, 1914 to 192.3 inclusive......................................... 58 IX. Motor Vehicle Accidents at Railroad Grade Crossings, New York and Its Environs, 1923............................................... 58 X. Day Population of Manhattan South of 59th Street on a Typical Business Day in 1924................................................. 62' XI. Dimensions of Surface Cars and Motor Buses in New York City........ 69 XII. Summary of Fourth Avenue Traffic Counts, Manhattan, New York City, June 2-8, 1924............................................... 78 XIII. Summary of Fourth Avenue Traffic Counts, Manhattan, New York City, June 8-14, 1924.............................................. 78 XIV. Constants for Length of Haul Equations for Various Types of Traffic... 91 XV. Maximum Hourly Traffic on Principal Highways in New York and Its Environs, 1922, and as Estimated for 1965.................... 109, 110 XVI. Maximum Vehicular Traffic Capacities on Various Types of Streets.... 111 XVII. Effect of Parking on Lane Capacity of Main Arterial Highways........ 112 XVIII. Maximum Hourly Vehicular Traffic Capacities of Existing and Proposed Entrances and Exits of the Metropolitan District of New York and Its Environs-Long Island........................................ 113 XIX. Maximum Hourly Vehicular Traffic Capacities of Existing and Proposed Entrances and Exits of the Metropolitan District of New York and Its Environs-Staten Island....................................... 116 XX. Maximum Hourly Vehicular Traffic Capacities of Existing and Proposed Entrances and Exits of the Metropolitan District of New York and Its Environs- New Jersey Metropolitan District...................... 117 XXI. Maximum Hourly Vehicular Traffic Capacities of Existing and Proposed Entrances and Exits of the Metropolitan District of New York and Its Environs- Westchester County................................. 118 XXII. Maximum Hourly Vehicular Traffic Capacities on North and South Avenues, Borough of Manhattan, New York City, 14th Street to 59th Street, under Existing and Proposed Conditions.................. 121 XXIII. Maximum Capacity of Manhattan Avenues as Compared with 1923 Traffic...................................................... 122 OUTSTANDING FACTS REVEALED BY THE INVESTIGATION Increase of Motor Vehicles THE great increase in motor vehicle registration has occurred in the last ten years, that is, since 1915, and the annual rate of increase is still growing (page 39). A LARGE percentage of the motor trucks produced in the United States have a capacity of one ton or less and there is a tendency for this percentage to increase (page 40). THE great increase in the number of pleasure cars since 1918 has been the main cause of the present highway congestion (page 40). THERE were in New York City in 1923 approximately 263,000 pleasure cars, 76,000 motor trucks and 20,000 motor buses and taxicabs (page 40). CURVES showing the relation between population and registration have been following a quite definite law and can be extended with a reasonable degree of accuracy (page 41). THE ratio between population and motor vehicles, that is, the number of persons per vehicle, in New York City has decreased from about 45 in 1916 to 16 in 1923; in the different boroughs this ratio varied in 1923 from about 9 to 21 persons per vehicle (pages 42 to 46). THERE were in New York and its environs in 1923 about 851,800 motor vehicles (page 42). THE ratio between population and motor vehicles in New York and its environs has decreased from about 35 in 1916 to 11 in 1923 (page 49). IT is estimated that there will be six persons per motor vehicle in New York City in 1935, resulting in a registration of 1,190,000 vehicles; corresponding figures for the entire region are 3.8 persons per motor vehicle and a registration of 3,150,000 vehicles (pages 48 to 51). By the year 1965 the total registration in the region may reach 6,720,000 vehicles; of this total 2,260,000, or six times the present city registration, might be within the present limits of New York City (page 53). Motor Vehicle Accidents WITHIN the five years 1918 to 1923 the ratio between motor vehicle accidents and registration has increased three and one-half times in the State of Connecticut, which may be assumed to represent average conditions in the entire area (page 54). IT is estimated that there were 2,030 fatalities which resulted from motor vehicle accidents in New York and its environs in 1923, representing an estimated financial loss of approximately $8,120,000 (page 55). THE rate of increase of motor vehicle fatalities in New York City has been slightly reduced since 1921, but the total is still in excess of 900 per year, and may reach 1,100 per year during 1928 (page 56). THE annual number of collisions between street cars and pedestrians in New York City has decreased 40 per cent from 1914 to 1923 (page 56). THE annual niumber of collisions between street cars and vehicles in New York City has increased 67 per cent from 1914 to 1923 (page 56). THE number of persons killed or injured at grade crossings between railroads and highways in New York City decreased from 39 in 1914 to 21 in 1921 and increased again 'to 38 in 1923 (page 57). DURING 1923 there were 298 motor vehicle accidents at railroad grade crossings in New York and its environs, in which 57 persons were killed and 153 injured (page 58). Traffic Congestion WHERE congestion is persistent and extends over a considerable period of the day it is probably caused by a defective street system, excessive height and bulk of buildings in the neighborhood, or both (page 59). THERE must be constant planning to relieve congestion as long as physical growth continues (page 59). THE financial losses to -the community resulting frorm traffic congestion are estimated at $500,000 per day on Manhattan Island and $1,000,000 per day in the entire region (page 61). THE day population of that part of Manhattan south of 59th Street on a typical business day in 1924 is estimated at 2,941,700 persons, of whom 982,000 are residents remaining in the area or transients (page 61). THE average daytime density of Manhattan south of 59th Street on a typical 1924 business day is about 350,000 persons per square miile or 550 persons per acre (page 62). THE one-way vehicular traffic entering Manhattan south of 59th Street during 24 hours on a typical 1924 business day is estimated at 204,750 vehicles; of this total 64.9 per cent comes from the north, 27.1 per cent from Long Island, 7.4 per cent from New Jersey (by ferries south of 59th Street) and 0.6 per cent from Staten Island (pages 63 and 64). IT is estimated that there were, under normal 1924 conditions, approximately 58,700 vehicles upon'the str~eets of Manhattan at one time and about 23,500 of these were moving vehicles (page 67). THE average speed of vehicles upon typical Manhattan streets during October and November, 1924, was 11.3 miles per hour, varying along different routes from a maximum of 15.3 miles per hour to a minimum of 7.8 miles per hour. The average speed in sections of well-regulated streets, such as Fifth Avenue, may be as low as between 5 and 6 miles per hour where congestion is greatest (page 68). Trolley Cars and Buses THE number of passengers handled by surface car lines in the region has remained practically stationary since 1914 (page 71). THE number of passengers carried by the Fifth Avenue Coach Company has increased by about five times since 191.4, and the number carried by buses operating out of Newark has increased by about twelve times since 1917 (page 71). ABOUT 3.1 passenger automobiles can be accommodated in the space within a street occupied by a trolley car and 1.4 passenger automobiles in the space occupied by a motor bus (page 73). Periodical JVariation of Traffic THE maximum traffic on the East River bridges occurs at about 5 p. m. and is about 170 per cent of the average hour; the minimum occurs between 4 and 5 a. m. and is about 20 per cent of the average hour (page 74). SUNDAY carries by far the heaviest traffic, reaching about 160 to 170 per cent of the daily average (page 77). TRUCK traffic on Fourth Avenue, Manhattan, is quite uniform from Mondays to Saturdays, inclusive, while ON Fourth Avenue, Manhattan, motor truck traffic is only about one-sixth of the passenger car traffic and one-third of the taxicab and motor bus traffic (page 77). MANHATTAN crosstown traffic is principally motor truck traffic, which is about twice the passenger car traffic and three times the taxicab and motor bus traffic (page 77). ON arterial highways the maximum traffic occurs during August and varies from 135 to 225 per cent of the average weekly number (page 77). THE seasonal variation of traffic throughout a year is much greater on the highways in the outlying parts of the region than on those in the central area (page 79). ON the East River ferries the maximum traffic occurs during July and is about 123 per cent of the average weekly number; the minimum is during February and is about 74 per cent of the average weekly number (page 79). Street Capacity THE capacity of a street expressed in car miles continues to increase with the velocity, while the number of vehicles which can pass a certain point per hour decreases after the velocity exceeds 14 to 15 miles per hour (pages 84 and 85). 1,880 VEHICLEs per hour is the maximum that might be expected on a single lane of uninterrupted traffic and could be obtained with velocities of about 15 miles per hour (page 86). 1,020 VEHICLES per lane per hour is the maximum that might be expected on a single lane of traffic on a street with tower traffic regulation, and could be obtained with running velocities of about 14 miles per hour (page 86). ON a street with several moving lanes the average lane capacity will probably not exceed 80 per cent of maximum single lane capacity (page 86). Length of Haul THE average length of haul of Manhattan taxicabs is about 1.5 miles (page 87). THE average length of haul of trucks handling railroad freight in Manhattan was 1.36 miles in 1918 and had increased about 34 per cent since 1913 (page 87). THE average length of haul of all motor vehicles passing a fixed point was found to be 55.2 miles on a typical Sunday and 56 miles on a typical weekday (page 88). ABOUT 45 per cent of all traffic originating within a district on a typical day travels at least 30 miles (page 89). Traffic Regulations and Planning PROPER planning of the means of communication should prevent the need of many restrictions (page 92). WHILE regulation of traffic has been carried about as far as is desirable in the central congested area, there is still opportunity for considerable improvement in the regulations in the outlying districts (page 92). A "PLATOON" system of traffic control would greatly increase the average speed of vehicles and result in an increase in car-mile capacity of about 100 per cent (page 93). RESTRICTING the time at which certain trucking operations can be carried out would relieve congestion in the business areas (page 94). ADDITIONAL parking facilities accessible to the business district must be provided (page 95). SERIOUs blocking of streets and sidewalks by the unloading and storage of merchandise is unjustifiable (page 95). PHYSICAL planning can accomplish better results than regulation in bringing about the segregation o hog and local traffic (page 95). CERTAIN highways must eventually be provided for the special use of motor trucks (page 96). PRESENT building height limitation is entirely inadequate to prevent resulting street congestion (page 97). THERE is a definite relationship between building heights and densities and street widthls, and estimates can be made of the amount of traffic created by buildings of certain bulks and types Of use (page 97). BY-PASS highway routes must be provided around the central business district (page 98). THERE are many places on the outskirts of the region where a separation of highway grades can be carried out at important intersections at a reasonable expense (page 98). STREET arcades are best adapted to relatively narrow streets where the cost of widening'would be prohibitive (page 99). Growth of Traffic THE growth of traffic on main highways in the most congested district has been almost directly proportional to motor vehicle registration (page 101). IN the less congested parts of the city traffic on the main highways has increased more slowly than the registration (page 102). IN the 43 years from 1922 to 1965 it is estimated that highway traffic in the separate counties will increase from 2.4 to 9.6 times (pa~ge 103). THE greatest increases of traffic will be in those counties immediately outside of the central congested area (page 103). TRAFFIC on the exits and ent 'rances to the central area has been doubling every four to eight years, but it is not probable that such rates of increase will continue (page 105). THE lane capacities of various types of streets vary from 400 to 1,500 vehicles per hour in accordance with the width and. nature of the street (page 111). PROVISION on arterial routes in the suburban areas for maximum Sunday traffic with all parking prohibited is practically equivalent to providing for the maximum business day traffic with the outside lanes reserved for parking or unloading of vehicles (page 112). THE estimated traffic in the year 1965 along or parallel to the present four principal arterial routes on Long Island is about twice what these highways could carry if developed to their -full roadway capacity and almost three and one-half times the present capacity of the seven principal routes (pages 116 and 119)'. IT is estimated that there Must be carried in the year 1965 on or parallel to the seven principal arterial routes in Metropolitan New Jersey more than three and one-half times their present capacity (page 119). THE estimated 1965 traffic on or parallel to the existing nine arterial routes in southern Westchester County is about three times their present maximum capacity (page 119). TRAFFIC on the Manhattan avenues crossing 48th Street will reach a point of saturation by about the year PROGRAM FOR A STUDY OF EXISTING FACILITIES FOR COMMUNICATION AND PLANS FOR THEIR IMPROVEMENT NOTE.-The following statement was prepared by the late Mr. Nelson P. Lewis, who from May, 1921, until his death in March, 1924, was at first Director of the Physical Survey and then Director of the Engineering Division of the Regional Plan of New York and Its Environs. It sets forth briefly and forcefully the basis upon which the studies of communication facilities were started and considerably advanced before his death. Since it was written there has been considerable change in the transit situation, principally in the creation of the New York City Board of Transportation, which on July 1, 1924, took over the location and construction of all new rapid transit lines within the City of New York. The Westchester County Transit Commission and North Jersey Transit Commission have both received appropriations which have permitted them to increase their activities. The program outlined by Mr. Lewis deals with the subjects of traffic, transit and transportation as defined in the first paragraph of his statement. The present report deals with traffic only. Transit and transportation will be the subject of a later report. January 15, 1924 The problem of communication, as presented in the territory included in the region of New York and its environs, may be divided into three distinct parts: I. Movement of persons or goods upon or along public highways by free-wheel vehicles operated for business or pleasure, by vehicles using tracks laid in the highways, and by vehicles not using tracks but receiving their power from conductors within the highways. This will be called TRAFFIc. II. Movement of persons and of mail, baggage and express matter, within or between the different cities or other municipal units included in the territory by ferries or other water routes, or by railroads operated municipally or by public service corporations in subways or tunnels, upon elevated structures, or upon separate rights of way but not upon the surface within the limits of public highways, or by some form of air craft. This will be called TRANSIT. III. The delivery at, shipment from, or transhipment through the Port of New York, or to, from, or between different points outside the port district, but within the territory under study, of freight of all kinds by railroad, deep sea or coastwise shipping, or by inland waterways, and the handling of passenger traffic by trunk line railroads. This will be called TRANSPORTATION. The above are not proposed as precise or scientific definitions but merely for convenience and clearness in the making of studies. In a broad sense all three parts come under the general term of transportation. Transit and railroad transportation overlap to such an extent that they must be considered together. I. TRAFFIC The purpose of a traffic study will be: (a) to summariie the nature of the problem; (b) to locate the points of greatest existing congestion, to ascertain the plans already in process of execution or under consideration by the public authorities which are designed to relieve such congestion, and to weigh the relative merits of such plans where there are alternates; (c) to suggest plans for relief where none has yet been proposed; and (d) to point out places where congestion will soon be serious, unless steps are taken in advance to avoid it, and to indicate what preventive treatment can most economically and effectively be applied. Places of Congestion and Remedies Proposed Existing traffic congestion may be due either to failure to use existing highway space to good advantage, or to actual lack of space within existing highways to accommodate the traffic, even if well regulated and distributed. Police regulation has accomplished much in facilitating movement and 17 is 18HIGHW,,A.Y TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS rendering the highways safer to those exercising reasonable care. It is probable that more may be done than has been done by re-routing traffic, particularly street surface cars and buses, by increasing 'the number of one-way streets, and by further restriction of left-hand turns. It is probable, also, that at some street and road intersections delays may be reduced by the gyratory movement of traffic with little or no expense for the taking of additional property. New streets and roads will have to be provided and some of those existing will have to be widened and extended. Valuable statistics have been prepared by the New York City Police Departnment, based upon actual traffic counts. The President of the Borough of Manhattan has made similar observation at strategic points. Some traffic counts have been made in other boroughs of the city, but they do not appear to have been very complete and thley were taken too long ago to be of much present value. Careful and quite comprehensive observations have been made by the State Highway Departments of New York and Connecticut, and at a few points by that of New Jersey, and all of these have been supplemented by counts made by the Engineering Division of the Regional Plan of New York and Its Environs. Valuable data have also been collected by the Port of New York Authority or its predecessor, the New York-New Jersey Port and Harbor Development Com'mission, concerning the great number of trucks wvhich congest the streets leading to the waterfront. Statistics of this kind soon become out of date owing not only to the constant increase in the volume of street traffic, but also to changes in the currents of traffic due to local conditions, such as the obstruction of a particular highway due to construction or repair involving disturbance of the roadway, or the paving or repaving of a highway which affords a new and not yet overcrowded route between certain points. And yet it is surprising to note the persistence with which many users of the road stick to old routes with which they are familiar, even though less crowded and often more direct routes are available. Many of the streets of Manhattan Island and some elsewhere have reached the saturation point and additional traffic counts would give little information of value. It is quite apparent that some measures of relief are necessary. Many have been proposed and in the course of the study these will be reviewed and their relative merits appraised. Further Proposals for Relief It may seem that the great number of suggestions which have been made looking to the relief of traffic congestion have covered nearly every reasonable or practicable solution, but the intent of the words "where none has yet been proposed" is to refer only to plans which have been officially put forward by responsible public authorities having jurisdiction. Many projects, some of them of much merit, have been suggested more or less informally, and these, or modifications or combinations of them, will be discussed. By7 far the greatest n umber of the plans which have been officially and unofficially put forward deal with conditions in the present City of New York and a few other intensively developed centers. The study which the Committee has undertaken through its several Surveys, or Divisions, is regional in its character, and there are many places outside of the largest centers of population where the existing conditions need correction after careful study. Not a few of these are in small towns or villages and even on country highways, where hnarrow and crooked roads, blind j unctions,- especially where combined with heavy grades,- railroad grade crossings, or narrow undercrossings with abrupt turns are the cause of serious accidents and frequent delays. Preventive Measures The population of various centers is increasing rapidlyv and new centers are being established. New PROGRAM FOR A STUDY OF COMMUNICATION FACILITIES 19 present new traffic problems, and will result in concentration at certain points where the confusion, delays and dangers now found at similar places will be repeated if not prevented. To correct such conditions after they have developed, involving, as it would, the taking of improved property, will be very costly; to prevent their development by providing adequate traffic capacity and avoiding points of over-concentration involves little expense. It is impossible to predict with certainty just where industries which will result in great increases in traffic will be located, but if ample roadways and direct connections with receiving and distributing points are provided these may be a potent factor in the more appropriate location of such enterprises. One of the purposes of the studies being made by the engineering staff of the Regional Plan is to determine where these focal points are likely to develop and to show how provision can be made to accommodate the traffic while this can be done with little disturbance of existing conditions and at small cost. II. TRANSIT In any study of this part of the general problem an effort should be made to outline as briefly as possible and in the most general way: (a) the transit system of the present City of New York; (b) the system which has been developed in New Jersey, including connections with New York City; (c) the several transit lines or systems in the remainder of the territory under study in the states of New York and Connecticut. (a) Transit in New York City' Transit development is under the general control of state bodies and such control is therefore much more centralized than is the case with respect to the provision of facilities for traffic. In New York there are two such bodies, one having jurisdiction within the City of New York and the other outside of that city. A large proportion of the existing rapid transit lines in the city have been built and are owned by the municipality, as is likely to be the case with nearly all future construction. The city provides the funds for these lines and has the sole power to grant franchises for new lines and extensions built by public service corporations, which must also secure certificates of public convenience and necessity from the Transit Commission. In order to provide much needed extensions of the present transit system there must, therefore, be co-operation between the city and state bodies. No new construction has been undertaken for some years past, nor has there been agreement upon plans for extensions, but there have lately been indications of a better understanding. A number of new routes are being seriously discussed and, as the two bodies have between them sufficient and exclusive power, it will probably be judicious to refrain from taking any part in the discussion of the extensions proposed by these bodies until they shall have come to agreement or indicated that they cannot agree. (b) The New Jersey System The portion of New Jersey included in the region is served generally by the Public Service Corporation of New Jersey and the Hudson and Manhattan Company, which latter provides the sole physical connection for transit, as here considered, with New York City by means of its four tracks under the Hudson River. The long-distance passengers and the commuters carried by the trunk line railroads (except the Pennsylvania in the case of most of its through passengers and a very few of its commuters) must finish their journey to Manhattan, where most of them are bound, by the Hudson and Manhattan tunnels or by the ferries. The Hudson and Manhattan Company, except for the very limited distance between Christopher and 33d Streets along Sixth Avenue, does not distribute its passengers, who must walk or use the surface cars or subway or elevated trains to reach their offices ' See introductory note, p. 17. 20 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS or places of employment. This puts a serious burden upon the city's subway and elevated lines which have been developed as a one-sided system, the main stems running up and down Manhattan Island with a number of branches running off to the east but none to the west. Such a development has been almost inevitable in view of the existence of the state line running down the Hudson River and lack of machinery for dealing with interstate transit. There has lately been created a North Jersey Rapid Transit Commission, and this body and the New York City Transit Commission appear to have been conferring with a view to the formulation of plans for a more intimate connection between the transit facilities of Northern New Jersey and New York City looking to the distribution of the traffic from New Jersey through Manhattan without overtaxing the present city transit system. It has also been proposed that the functions of the Port of New York Authority be enlarged so as to enable that body to provide for transportation of passengers as well as of freight within the port district. (c) Other Transit Lines in New York and Connecticut Outside of those outlined under (a) and (b) there are no extensive transit systems within the area of the region. Several of the larger towns have their own surface railways and some of those near each other are served by a single company, there being a tendency towards consolidation into a few larger systems. Motor bus lines are also being established and are operated upon a number of the improved state roads. As New York City's rapid transit lines are extended to or approach the city limits, especially at places where populous centers exist immediately beyond the boundary, a large part of the capacity of these lines is likely to be absorbed by residents of outside communities who can thereby reach downtown Manhattan and parts of the boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens for a single five-cent fare, while residents of New York City who have been and are being taxed to provide these city-owned lines often find the trains filled before they reach their home stations, even though these may be quite near the terminals of the lines. Similarly large numbers of commuters taking the subway or elevated trains at terminal railway stations, when they can find room, make it still more difficult for those wishing to board trains below these stations to find even standing room. This problem is receiving serious consideration by the public authorities and the corporations affected and the several solutions proposed are being studied by the engineering staff of the Regional Plan. III. TRANSPORTATION The problem of Transportation is that of a great seaport and a great railroad terminal. The distinct kinds of transportation to be considered are: (a) the handling of freight and its distribution by rail, car-float and lighter; (b) the collection and delivery of freight by motor truck; (c) the handling of passengers daily arriving at and leaving the central district by trunk line railroads. (a) Co-ordination of Rail and Water Transport Facilities Three-fourths of the railroads serving the port district have their terminals in New Jersey and have no physical connection with the cities east of the Hudson River. It would seem, therefore, that there are few seaport cities where the rail and water transportation facilities need to be more completely co-ordinated and where it is more important that the port district should be treated as a unit, but there are few, if any, where this need has been so persistently ignored. As the result of a treaty between the states of New York and New Jersey there has recently been created a Port Authority which is empowered to create and administer a port district. It has prepared comprehensive plans which include some novel features for direct connections, of the trunk-line railroads having their railheads in New Jersey with Manhattan Island. These have not yet met with PROGRAM FOR A STUDY OF COMMUNICATION FACILITIES 2 91 approval by the railroads, and neither the Port Authority nor its plans have been regarded with any great sympathy or friendliness by the New York City authorities who are tryintodvlplasf their own but have no -authority extending beyond the corporate limits of the city. A number of other plans have been proposed by corporations and individuals who claim that they can solve the problem. These several plans must be carefully considered and their merits compared. (b) The Motor Truck The rapid increase of the use of the motor truck in the distribution of freight justifies the belief that it is to play a very important part in the handling of freight. The need of providing for this means of transport on the public highways was discussed under Transit. Its use supplemental to or in competition with the railroad has been so fully discussed in an excellent report by a special committee of the United States Chamber of Commerce on the " Relation of Highways and Motor Transport to other Transportation Agencies " that it is needless to say more upon this subject than to refer to that report. (c) Caring for the Commuter The problem of taking care of the great number of commuters brought to and taken from the railway terminals every day was referred to under the subject of Transit. Many of them depend upon the city's transit system to complete their journeys to their offices and places of employment. Great nunmbers also arrive by ferry from the New Jersey side of the Hudson and by the Hudson and Manhattan tunnels. All of these commuters and visitors contribute to the prosperity and wealth of the city and are entitled to proper facilities for reaching their business or their hotels. The question is whether such facilities should be provided by the city or whether the railroads should distribute those passengers which they bring to the present ends of their lines. Railroad terminals are becoming swamped by the commuters, and pleas have been made by the companies that the city build subway lines which would take their passengers at points further out so that they can continue to accommodate their long-distance passengers at their present terminals which, it is claimed, cannot otherwise be done. NELSON P. Luwis MAPS AND DIAGRAMS, PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF NELSON P. LEWIS, ILLUSTRATING PHYSICAL CONDITIONS AND SYSTEM OF HIGHWAYS IN THE REGION GENERAL TOPOGRAPHIC CONDITIONS T HE topography in the New York region greatly complicates the development of a suitable system of radial and connecting highways. The most important of these topographical features are indicated on the map on the opposite page, where the darker shades represent the higher elevations. The entire area is cut almost in two by the Hudson River, the only bridge in this part of its length being that opened in November, 1924, at Bear Mountain. Other bridges have been suggested to connect Manhattan Island with the New Jersey shore. Long Island Sound effectually isolates all of Long Island from highway connection with the rest of the territory, except by passing through the congested parts of New York City. A continuous ridge of mountains, reaching an elevation of over 1,600 feet, cuts across the northerly part of the area and permits through north and south highway routes only immediately adjacent to the Hudson River and through the Ramapo Valley. In New Jersey the only routes at low elevation to points west of the Orange and Watchung Mountains are through the gaps at Paterson and Springfield. In the eastern part of Westchester County, New York, and in Fairfield County, Connecticut,-the irregular topography and large number of streams running north and south make difficult the development of additional inland highways parallel to Long Island Sound. The location and shape of the island of Manhattan has resulted in an enormous concentration of automobile traffic in a restricted area. One of the physical conditions which has resulted and is becoming of increasing importance is the presence upon its streets of large amounts of poisonous gases from the automobile exhausts, the diffusion of which is rendered difficult by the tall buildings which flank the streets. 24 7~ ZZ Z rn 4 V: z r~$ La K) C-fl r \U i-~,i8.; -~Yn~ d 2\ g:; ('I, r: C;. NEW YORK AND ENVIRONS PRINCIPAL IMPROVED ROADS 3CALL 5TRECTS LAID OU T ASARTERIAL TRDROUDFARES BUT ROT YET IMPROVED ARE SHWM BY DROKEN LWELS + LLUND~r EA~lr,.r 5 foo REGIONAL r5 -. PLAN OF NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONMS P"SCAL %4rn7ZY-)3 L ZCST. FIG. 2 PRINCIPAL IMPROVED ROADS The above drawing shows the principal improved roads in the district and indicates quite clearly the tangled network from which it is necessary to develop a comprehensive system of highways. 26 NEW YORK AND ENVIRON5 showing TRUNK LINE MHIlGWAY5 0 5 10 1923 LEGEND Boundaries Stat-e - County - - Hig hways Existing S Propo~sed,,,. Ferries Exisrin * **** Proposedl o 0 " NoTE-Circles show disance from New York Citt Hall. Jf REGIONAL PLAN OF NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS. P -IXZAL -ý-V.so Cr-5 FIG. 3 TRUNK LINE HIGHWAYS The through traffic in the region is carried by a relatively small number of the principal improved roads. There is indicated in the accompanying map those which form parts of the main arterial and circumferential routes, and also carry most of this through traffic. 27 THEORETICAL DIAGRAM OF MAIN HIGHWAYS REDUCING the trunk line highways to a theoretical diagram it appears that the main axis would include the Albany Post Road and the highway from Perth Amboy to Philadelphia. A subsidiary axis would pass down the west side of the Hudson River and include the Lincoln Highway. An outer circumferential route would start from Patchogue on southern Long Island, cross by ferry from Port Jefferson to Bridgeport, and go by way of Newburgh, Lake Hopatcong, Somerville and Freehold to Asbury Park. A second one starting at Long Beach passes through the outer limits of the principal commuting zone and connects up such points as Rye, White Plains, Suffern, Morristown, Plainfield, Perth Amboy and Atlantic Highlands. An inner one passes through a more intensively developed area, including New Rochelle, Yonkers, Paterson, Montclair and Rahway. 28 ~_ ~ O -O O?-r Z ATLANTIC OCEAN Branch THEORETICAL DIAGRAM SMOW ING MAIN HIGHWAY ROUTES THE NEW YORK DISTRICT FULL LINES SHOW GENERAL LOCATION OF EXISTING ROADS. BROKEN LINES S4-R4 DIRECT CONNECTIONS WHICH MAY BE SUPPLIED IN111 FUTURE. EXISTING FERRIES -- - 1923 P-EGIONAL PLAN OF NEW YO12K AND A50 ITS ENVIQONS. PHYSICAL SURVEY. FIG. 4 29 RELATION OF HIGHWAY SYSTEM AND MAIN CONNECTING HIGHWAYS IN A LARGER DISTRICT IN ORDER to show the importance of the various trunk line highways in New York and its environs they have been studied in relation to a larger district of about 200 miles radius from the center of New York City. The tinted part of the map on the opposite page represents the New York regional area with its trunk line highways. The main connecting highways between this area and communities in the larger area with over 50,000 population in 1920 are indicated. It appears that there are eleven such highway connections, four of them being east of the Hudson River, two leading to that part of New York State west of the Hudson River, and the other five connecting with New Jersey, Pennsylvania and states to the south. The relative populations of those cities outside of the New York regional area are indicated by the areas of the various circles. Philadelphia is the nearest great metropolitan district and its circle of influence probably reaches to the southwesterly edge of the New York region. All but three of the trunk line highways indicated are seen to form parts of main routes to these larger communities. One of these follows the ocean-front in Monmouth County and serves the beach resorts directly south of the area without leading to any large communities. The other two lead to the northwesterly part of New Jersey, where the irregular topography is not well adapted to through routes. 30 Ni, _ Lo Iz o! L2 O ýD 2;6 So Li oo 0 C 54 Lo oui Z L440V Z <~ to~ aj 31 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC CENSUS, 1922 beam in a building has to the entire building. Each should be designed for the maximum load that it will be called upon to carry. Most of the available highway traffic statistics were for periods of several hours or longer. In order to form a picture of the maximum load now being carried by the principal arterial highways in New York and its environs, figures were obtained for the maximum hourly traffic on these roads. Factors were determined upon for reducing available statistics to this basis and new counts were made at 27 different points during the summer of 1922. The results of these observations and studies are indicated in Fig. 6. This does not include the highways in the central congested area (the boroughs of Manhattan, Bronx, Brooklyn and Queens, in New York City, Hudson County, New Jersey, and the city of Newark), as the traffic in this area is too great to be shown at the same scale. The counts made were taken on Saturdays and Sundays during the summer months and under favorable weather conditions. They indicated clearly that the maximum hourly traffic occurred during the latter part of the Sunday afternoons, traffic at this time generally being from 50 per cent to 100 per cent greater than the maximum hourly traffic on the Saturday preceding. It is therefore clearly established that the amount of pleasure traffic on such roads determines their necessary capacity. The maximum hourly traffic indicated occurs on the Boston and Albany Post Roads near the New York City Line, and the Lincoln Highway in the city of Elizabeth, the traffic at these points reaching a total of 1,400 to 1,600 vehicles. On the Merrick Road, Long Island,there was a count of about 1,300 vehicles per hour at the city line, while the other radial highways in Nassau County (Northern Boulevard, Jericho Turnpike and Hempstead Turnpike) carried traffic varying from 1,035 to 1,105 vehicles per hour. 32 A BRIDGEPORT 1922 NEW YORK AND ENVIRONS ESBUR6. HIGHWAY TRAFFIC CENSUS SHOWING GRAPHICALLY THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF VEHICLES PASSING FREHOLDGIVEN POINTS WITHIN AN HOUR SbURYSCALE OF MILES 0 5 10 PARK VEHICLES PER HOUR REGIONAL PLAN OF NEW YORK AND 500 1000 1500 ITS ENVIRONS ENGINEERING DIVISION FIG. 6 REPRESENTING CONDITIONS DURING THIE SUMMER OF 1922 Within the cross-sectioned area the traffic is too great to be shown at the scale used. 33 THE HIGHWAY TRAFFIC PROBLEM IN NEW YORK and ITS ENVIRONS An Investigation of THE PRESENT HIGHWAY FACILITIES IN THE AREA THE MAIN FACTORS WHICH HAVE INFLUENCED THE RAPID GROWTH IN THE DEVELOPMENT-OF MOTOR VEHICLES AND THE RESULTANT HIGHWAY CONGESTION THE TRENDS IN MOTOR VEHICLE USE WITHIN DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE AREA AND THE PROBABLE FUTURE OF SUCH TRENDS THE VARIOUS METHODS OF RELIEVING TRAFFIC CONGESTION THE ABILITY OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED FACILITIES TO TAKE CARE OF FUTURE TRAFFIC DEMANDS A Presentation of BASIC DATA NEEDED FOR THE SATISFACTORY SOLUTION OF BOTH THE REGIONAL AND LOCAL HIGHWAY PROBLEMS HIGHWAY PROPOSALS FROM VARIOUS SOURCES I. THE NATURE OF THE PROBLEM AND METHODS OF STUDY HE problem of communications in the regional area of New York and its environs is probably the most complicated in the world. This is true not only because the area probably contains the largest population of any area of similar size, but also because of the unusual topographic conditions which break it up in such a manner that it is difficult to provide access between its separate parts, and the greater degree of intensity of use of land in proportion to available street space that exists in New York as compared with other great cities. The complications affect all problems of transportation, but none to a greater extent than that which takes the form of traffic movement on highways and streets, which is the subject of this report. In approaching the study of traffic in the region it has been necessary to collect a large amount of special data, because those which have been prepared for other communities are not suitable for application to the peculiar conditions of New York. When a city has reached such a point in its growth that large numbers of people have to travel to and from their business daily, and while it continues to grow, it must always have a traffic problem. In 1860 New York City (Manhattan) had only 813,669 inhabitants; in 1920 the same area had 2,284,103 inhabitants and a vast day population in addition. Whereas in 1860 each citizen rode 43 times on a public vehicle in each year, the number of rides per citizen in 1920 was 405 and is still increasing. The constancy of the problem under different conditions, and its change in location, are indicated by the fact that in 1850 Broadway was so crowded with omnibuses that the first effort was made to build a surface railway within that thoroughfare. The part of Broadway affected by overcrowding at that time is now comparatively free from congestion. A member of the Royal Commission on London Traffic visiting New York in 1903 reported that the problem of traffic was almost as difficult in New York as in London, but differed in the respect that the omnibus had largely ceased to exist and had been displaced by the trolley. Cabs were not much used because they were too expensive. Today it looks as if the motor omnibus were about to replace the trolley on many routes and the taxicab has become so popular as to be a large element in crowding the streets. Changes in transit facilities affecting the street traffic problem prior to 1902 were indicated by the fact that during the preceding twelve years the mileage of street and electric railway tracks in New York and parts of Westchester increased by 523 to 1299. In 1903 there were still in New York City 779 miles of macadam and 753 miles of unpaved streets.' These facts indicate the changing character of the problem. The nature of the problem is much more complex than is indicated by the statement that is frequently made, that the trouble lies in having an unnecessary multiplication of vehicles on the streets, having regard to the limited space available for traffic movement. There are proper ways in which this multiplication can be lessened, of which probably the most important is in preventing the extensive use of street space for private purposes, including loading and unloading of commercial vehicles and the parking of pleasure cars. The main purpose of a street is for movement; and if a large percentage of its width is taken up for a considerable portion of the day by standing vehicles engaged in operations that should be performed on private property, serious obstruction of the traffic lanes is inevitable. When all has been done, however, to prevent improper use of the street, there will continue to be overcrowding of vehicles so long as there is excessive concentration of business use in certain areas and lack of comprehensive planning to reduce this concentration and secure more adequate means of arterial circulation. The problem of circulation is particularly acute at junctions and intersections of streets, and this is one of the phases of the problem that is most pressing for some kind of solution. 'Statement by Hon. S. N. D. North, Director of U. S. Census, in Vol. IV, Report of Royal Commission on London Traffic, 1906. 36 THE NATURE OF THE PROBLEM AND METHODS OF STUDY 37 It has been pointed out that the problem is too variable in its characteristics to permit of any solution which approaches finality. It is also influenced by so many factors covering such wide areas that it makes little response to what may be called local treatment. Highway traffic congestion is a problem of the city or region rather than a problem of the highway itself. This fact has been recognized whenever a serious effort has been made to consider the causes of traffic congestion. A representative and influential Traffic Conference met in Washington on December 15, 1924, under the chairmanship of the Honorable Herbert Hoover. This Conference considered conclusions arrived at by committees of the best experts that could be chosen, dealing with the principal phases of the subject of street traffic and safety. The Conference put in the forefront of its findings on state legislation the need for enabling acts that will empower cities and other local units to provide for a proper development of their territory, and criticised the tendency of communities to institute too many restrictive laws and regulations. It was claimed that hazards in streets and highways could be largely reduced by the proper arrangement of such facilities. The importance was emphasized of eliminating grade crossings along major traffic arteries or boulevards. The need for considering the problem comprehensively was indicated by the recognition shown of the need for a comprehensive study of traffic-originating centers and outlying areas, the creation of by-pass highways, and the promotion of zoning and decentralization. The Conference summed up its attitude on the question by advocating that each community should coordinate all its efforts in a comprehensive traffic and thoroughfare plan developed in consonance with the plan for the transportation and transit lines at stations, and with adequate zoning regulations. It is a significant fact that the Royal Commission on London Traffic, which reported in 1905, advocated as one of its main conclusions the preparation of a comprehensive plan for the improvement and construction of the main highways. When a study of a city is made for the purpose of devising a plan, as a guide for its future growth, it is seen how much wasted effort is being expended on temporary expedients. While it has been necessary in this monograph to limit consideration to some distinct phases of the problem of traffic, it is fully recognized that the problem is related to the whole question of transportation, including long distance railroads and rapid transit, and to the question of the uses and densities of buildings over wide regions. Moreover, these numerous related questions have to be considered from the point of view of the future rather than of the immediate present, and with due regard to existing tendencies as well as past experience. The vast field of study that has to be explored makes it necessary to deal separately with different phases, so that the present report does not completely cover the field of traffic studies outlined by Mr. Nelson P. Lewis in his introductory program. The Physical Survey, carried out under the able direction of Mr. Lewis, furnished the fundamental sources of data for the present study. This survey included a detailed study of the past and present distribution of population; the preparation of many maps and diagrams showing the existing physical conditions and their relation to all methods of communication and to public and semi-public facilities, such as recreation and sanitation; and the collection of data setting forth the numerous and varied proposals for the improvement of conditions. A brief summary of some of the detailed studies made in connection with the highway traffic problem was contained in a paper presented at the conference on traffic problems held under the auspices of the Regional Plan of New York and Its Environs and several other municipal and civic organizations on May 20, 1924. This report contains not only the material presented at that time but a more detailed statement of the basic information and the results of further studies which have been carried out since that date. The following classification of highway problems has been found useful and has been used in this study: 1. The arterial and circumferential system in the entire area. 2. Those highways in the congested districts surrounding Manhattan Island which might 38 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS be considered as exits and entrances to the metropolitan center. 3. The highway system in the borough of Manhattan, particularly within the section south of 59th Street. The motor vehicle has become the chief factor in highway traffic and a main essential of all plans for the future must be to make adequate provision for the growth of this form of transportation. For that reason the major part of this report deals with motor traffic. There are very few places in the area where horse-drawn traffic is an appreciable factor on highways which might be considered of regional importance. Where vehicles must be kept standing in line for long periods of time due to delay at ferry connections or at freight terminals, the horse-drawn vehicle is still an important factor. This applies particularly to the railroad freight terminals in the southern part of Manhattan and the ferries to New Jersey from this same district. As improved facilities are provided requiring less delay, the motor truck will probably supersede the slower type of vehicle at these points, as it has done almost completely on the main arterial highway system. Physical obstructions create the greatest difficulties in solving the highway problem, but there are also difficulties caused by existing economic and social conditions. In developing the final regional plan, future economic conditions will have an important effect upon the distribution of trucking traffic and must be taken into careful consideration. Social conditions, so far as they affect the density of population and the location of residential centers, will influence the amount and distribution of passenger traffic. The investigations which have been made show quite clearly that through traffic is primarily passenger traffic, and that the relative locations of the resident population and their corresponding places of business form the principal basis for estimating the amount of future traffic. The serious nature of the problem has been emphasized by the attention which recently has been given to it by various officials and organizations. Most attention has been given to suggestions for relieving conditions on Manhattan Island, but, as this study is in connection with the development of a regional plan for New York and its environs, emphasis is placed upon highways of regional importance, and details which relate primarily to local problems become of secondary importance. Due, however, to the extremely congested conditions in the central part of New York City and the effect of these conditions on the circulation of the entire area, special attention has been given to this part of the region. II. MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION AND PRODUCTION 1. Past Records The history of motor vehicles in the United States started about 1895 with a registration of 300 vehicles. The growth was fairly uniform until about 1915, at which time there were approximately 2,500,000 of such vehicles registered. The great increase in motor registration has been since that year, and in 1923 the total was approximately 15,000,000, and the annual rate of increase was still growing. Fig. 7 indicates the ANNUAL REGISTRATION OF U.S. MOTOR VEHICLES Oct-.1924 151 - I - - -7 - [2 te __ _ _- _ _-J - / -- - curve, as is indicated in Fig. 8, which shows the number of motor vehicles produced annually in the United States during the same period, the upper curve showing the passenger vehicles and the lower one showing the motor trucks. The slump in the production of passenger vehicles during the war and during the business depression in 1921 is clearly indicated. It is also seen that the production of motor trucks was, on the contrary, increased during the war period, but 190- 1906 1910 1914 1918 1922 1900 1904 1908 1912 FIG. 7 FIG. 8 total United States registration from 1900 to 1923 and shows quite clearly that from these data alone it is impossible to predict with any certainty the future of this curve. The annual production of motor vehicles gives quite a different also suffered a slump during the year 1921. The production in 1923 brings both of these curves approximately back in line with those parts of the curves showing conditions previous to the war. 39 40 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS The total production, annual registrations, and total number of cars scrapped between the years 1908 and 1923 are shown in Fig. 9. It appears that of the approximately 19,000,000 vehicles which had been put into domestic use up to the end of the year 1923, about 3,900,000, or 20j2 per cent, had been scrapped. The average life of a motor vehicle, represented by the horizontal distance between the production curve and that Curves 5how Zo U. S. MOTOR VEHICLE PRODUCTI NUMBER OF GARS < Oct. 1924 Note: 'L' is the averaqe life of moto ( n o Production figures include U. 0j? in Conada 0 4 -0 1908 1910 1912 1914 F] showing the number of cars scrapped, has been increasing and is now more than seven years. Fig. 10 is a study of the United States annual motor truck production figures since the World War, showing a curve for the total number of trucks and separate curves for one ton and under, one and one-half to two and one-half tons, th-ree and one-half tons, and five tons and over. These curves are made very irregular by the slump in production during the business depression in 1921 but indicate the very large percentage of the smaller sizes of trucks and a tendency for this percentage to increase. In New York City alone there were, in 1923, about 263,000 pleasure cars, 76,000 motor trucks, and 20,000 omnibuses, which include both buses and taxicabs. The annual registrations for these different classifications are shown in Fig. 11 and indicate that there has been comparatively little change in the proportion of each of these during [G. 9 the past few years. It is obvious, however, that the great increase in pleasure cars since 1918 has been the main factor in motor vehicle congestion in New York City. Table I gives a summary of New York City motor vehicle registrations from 1919 to 1923 and shows the distribution by boroughs and by different classifications of vehicles. Table II, compiled from state statistics, shows the motor vehicle registration from 1916 to 1923 inclusive for New York and its environs and for the included portions of the various states. MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION AND PRODUCTION 41 TABLE I.-MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION IN NEW YORK CITY BY BOROUGHS, 1919-1923 (Does not include Exempts or Dealer and Trailers) Pleasure Omni- Trucks Motor- Total cars buses cycles Manhattan 1919 54,070 5,835 21,893 3,114 84,912 1920 61,751 7,582 27,336 3,819 100,488 1921 67,690 8,295 28,479 3,501 107,965 1922 71,203 10,141 30,400 3,414 115,158 1923 81,989 12,314 31,534 3,447 129,284 Brooklyn 1919 43,126 1,415 11,810 2,868 59,219 1920 52,205 1,931 15,654 3,200 72,990 1921 63,246 3,433 17,736 2,952 87,367 1922 79,840 3,295 21,980 2,547 107,662 1923 95,084 3,406 25,058 2,495 126,043 Queens 1919 16,030 652 3,785 1,231 21,698 1920 19,474 808 4,875 1,600 26,757 1921 26,476 1,060 6,469 1,259 35,264 1922 35,466 1,235 8,353 1,109 46,163 1923 47,127 1,414 10,241 1,099 59,881 The Bronx 1919 9,418 945 2,598 912 13,873 1920 11,552 988 3,021 513 16,074 1921 17,946 1,477 4,838 973 25,234 1922 23,702 2,466 5,083 1,112 32,363 1923 29,261 2,089 6,265 889 38,504 Richmond 1919 4,106 285 971 152 5,514 1920 4,971 309 1,283 271 6,834 1921 5,710 435 1,630 295 8,070 1922 7,450 343 2,144 255 10,192 1923 9,133 319 2,524 266 12,242 Total for City 1919 126,750 9,132 41,057 8,277 185,216 1920 149,953 11,618 52,169 9,403 223,143 1921 181,068 14,700 59,152 8,980 263,900 1922 217,661 17,480 67,960 8,437 311,538 1923 262,594 19,542 75,622 8,196 365,954 400W 400 U.S. ANNUAL PRODUCTION OF 360 MOTOR TRUCKS CLASSIFIED ACCORDING TO CAPACITY (360o Oct 1924 Tot _______ --- -- 3SO u'3 23 0 H-. c 0 U o ~ 4 -3 Ic C 0 +L 0~ 3 L F-5 0 3 L 0 ' 280 so -IZ-------- 240 160 -160 40 / 4 191 199 1 19--- -- - -9 9o 1918 1919 19?0 19ZI 19ZZ 1935 FIG. 10 2. Estimates of Future Growth The growth and trends of the population in the district being studied are the most potent factors in any estimate of the future number of automobiles. The diagrams just referred to show clearly that the curves for registration or production of motor vehicles are still climbing so rapidly that it is impossible to project them with any degree of certainty. A study of the relation between population and registration indicates that curves showing the number of persons per motor vehicle have been following a quite definite law. If a relation can then be established between registration and traffic it becomes possible to make a reasonable prediction for future traffic based upon population estimates. 42 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS TABLE II.-NUMBER OF MOTOR VEHICLES IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS Year 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 Part of Connecticuta 12,690 17,322 18,330 22,529 25,416 30,000* 35,000* 40,627 Part of New Jerseyb* 67,230 85,570 94,470 129,000 141,650 173,700 219,150 290,500 Part of New York State excluding New York Cityat 43,572 53,889 56,720 66,000 76,887 92,504 127,233 149,674 New York Citya 116,858 132,926 146,395 187,258* 225,185 266,099 313,723 371,003 dicate the number of persons per motor vehicle in New York City and each of its boroughs from 1916 to 1923, with estimates to the year 1935. The first diagram is on semi-logarithmic paper, where the resulting curves closely approximate straight lines and can, therefore, be extended with reasonable certainty. The second diagram is simply the replotting of these curves on ordinary cross 240,350 289,707 315,915 404,787 469,138 562,303 695,106 851,804 a Obtained from State Tax Reports. b Basic data obtained from New Jersey State Highway Department. * Estimated. t Registration of parts of Dutchess and Rockland counties estimated from total county registrations. Several independent estimates have been made for the future population within New York and its environs up to the year 1965, and these correspond closely enough to make them sufficiently reliable for regional planning purposes. The population estimates used in this study are shown in Figs. 12 and 13, the first of these showing the estimated population as based upon the division of the area into three groups, and the second showing detail figures for the counties in the central part of the area, or Group 1. These curves indicate that the total population in the entire area will probably reach 12,000,000 in the year 1935, of which 7,120,000 would be within the present limits of New York City. By the year 1965 a total population of 21,000,000 may be expected, of which about 11,278,000 would be within the present limits of the City of New York. Estimates made for a longer period of years show considerable discrepancies and there are so many factors which may radically affect the growth of the community that predictions beyond 1965 are highly problematical and even those for the shorter period present many uncertainties. New York City.- Figs. 14 and 15 (page 45) in U) 10 c -0 C cr) (3 V) L $-- 0 0 C 0 0 L U) c, 0t FIG. 11 section paper which is more readily interpreted and gives a truer picture of the variation. There were in the entire city about 45 persons per motor vehicle in 1916, and in 1923 this figure had been reduced to about 16 persons per vehicle, while those for the different boroughs at the latter date varied from about nine to 21 persons per vehicle. As would be expected, there is a smaller number of persons per vehicle, or a larger number Group 1 I GroupZ SGroup 3 Area New York City Newark City 365 sq.mrni. Hudson County Nassau County Westchester County Fairfield County (Part) Bergen County (Part)sq.i. Passaic County (Part),170 s.i Essex County (Excluding Newark) Union County The Remainder 3.993 scq.mi. Total Area: 5,5Z8 sq.mi. -nn T - 1 Z1 Z I I I I 10 I I 1 I I I I I I I - I -f1 1 I I_?n - nn _ I KI I I _ I I I I I I - 4 I -I I I I l 11 1 1 1 1,_ -o -t 11f 1 I 1 'll 1J% ~ L 10,000 10,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 __ I _ liii- _1~ -L' i - o 1 1A 3Vnnny 4000n -',vv 3,000,-,,, I,000,000 ~~0c3, __ -e 1,000 1,000 500 500 400 400 300 1 - - - - 300 200 zoo I -I I I I I _ ~ I. I I I I 1 10 100 \00 POPULATION OF NEW YORK & ENVIRONS 50C FROM \850 TO 1920 50 40 WITH ESTIMATES TO THE YEAR 1965 30.30 ~30 Figures for Different Groups Relate 30 c20 - to Boundaries as Existing in 1920 20 Oct. 19Z4 10I _ 1__ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ __. 1 10 0 1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 FIG. 12 43 GROUP 1 New York County Kings 11 Bronx Queens Richmond 7" -2z Area 696 42 City of New York 298 sq.mi. 108 57fJ Hudson County Newark (City) Total Areax: 365 sq. mi, 4r3 sq. mi. Z4 sq~nii. -A-- 1-1 - in onn -5,000 31000 Z2000 11000 i I I I T I I I I I ---r I I I I 1 1 1 1 mýý I --f- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -4 - 1 1 1 1 -ý (ion A.~ ff-. k - i i -r -4.W6.%->w9 i i::P-l - 1 i i i i i 12,- - 1 11000 -r--~ -J K(Ok i i 1 -.,ý 1 i i i i i i W-i i l i- i oe 500l AIIA buu 400 300n 77T7' ~4F 1 (0 0 -C 0 D-?00 zoo-'i<~t 100er /GROUP0 50 FRM-70TS1o 20to-c-20~ 10- ____________________ 1790 1800 1810 1820O 18350 184 1850 1860 1870 1580 1890 1900 1910 19Z0 1930 1940 1950 1960 FIG. 13 44 U 4 -0 C, 0 a FIG. 14 - 50 48 Curves Showing 48 46 _VARIATION OF NUMBER OF PERSONS 46 46 PER MOTOR VEHICLE From 1916 to 1935 in the City of New York 42 Oct. 1924 42 40 40 38 - 38 36 - 36 34 34 32 32 30 30 281 n II I I I I I r I I r - 28 26 1 I I I 126 24 24 221 ___ ___ \ 1 22 20 2 zo 18 0 18 A ',I --) 6 --6- 16 4 -14 -12 O 12 10 1 ýjc, 6 \Ci \T0~0 4 010 1916 1918 1920 1922 1926 1928 FIG. 15 45 1930 1932 1934 46 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS of cars per 1,000 persons, in the less densely settled portions of the city. It appears likely that in 1935 there will be about six persons per motor vehicle in the entire city. Brooklyn would have about the same ratio, while the Bronx and Man400 380- Curves Showing VARIATION OF NUMBER OF MOT( 360 PER THOUSAND PERS( From 1916 to 1935 in the City of Oct.19E4 320 300 S280 CLZ 260 -20 OCO 1420- - - - - - - 180 +- 120 / 20 Qii gram, Fig. 16, has been prepared to show the number of motor vehicles per 1,000 persons for the same areas over the same period. These curves show still more strikingly the rapid growth in the use of the automobile and indicate that this FIG. 16 hattan would have about nine and ten persons per motor vehicle respectively and Queens might be expected to have the lowest ratio of about two and one-half persons per vehicle, while Richmond would have slightly more than three persons per vehicle. Based on these same data another dia growth might be expected to decrease slightly after the year 1930. With the data in the preceding curves and the estimated populations as shown in Fig. 13, curves have been prepared showing the past and estimated motor vehicle registrations of New York MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION AND PRODUCTION 47 Curves Showing ACTUAL AND ESTIMATED MOTOR VEHICLE. RESISTRATION IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK AND ITS BOROUGHS Oct. 1924 Note: Based upon Estimated Population and Number of Persons per Motor Vehicle 1100 1000 0) -a (0 I4: o iL '-" 09 03 ra, o t 700 400 300 200 1922 19Z4 I1 FIG. 17 City and each of its boroughs from 1916 to 1935. These results are shown in Fig. 17, which indicates a total of about 1,190,000 motor vehicles in the year 1935 based on an estimated population of 7,120,000. It is indicated that the total registration in Brooklyn was, in 1923, very nearly equal to that in Manhattan and thereafter will probably exceed it. The total for Queens will 50 IRn a) 40 30 so Curves Showing VARIATION OF NUMBER OF PERSONS PER MOTOR VEH\CLE From 1916 to 1935 in New York & Environs Oct.1\924 Q) 15 99 o 7 6 CL a; 4 U) oJ (D L Q) CL 2 I I: I I 1 1 ~:zew y I or I I I - i - - - I I I Its F`, 40 30 20 15 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 o -----.... ____ I _ I _ ff iL 191E 6 1918 1922 1924 FIG. 18 FIc. 18 1926 1928 1930 1932 1934 a) 30 28 o 26 Z4 S22 S20 0 u' 18 L a) S16 14 12 10 FIG. 19 48 MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION AND PRODUCTION 49 probably pass that for Manhattan during the year 1928. By the year 1950 the number of persons per vehicle will probably have become quite stable and from that date the ratio between the number of vehicles and the population should 400 80Curves Showing VARIATION OF NUMBER OF MOT 360 PER THOUSAND PERS( From 1916 to 1935 in New York 34oOct.19Z4 320 300 0 280 n 60 S240 o Z-O FS200 > 140-- ^,60 --- - - ---- ^, / > 40 o / \ < of the area, or the environs. Figs. 18 and 19 (page 48) indicate the number of persons per motor vehicle in these areas from 1916 to 1935. It appears that, as was the case in the city itself, the number of persons per motor vehicle is much lower in the 1--i- - i 400 FIG. 20 be more nearly constant, provided of course that some other form of transportation does not supersede the automobile. New York and Its Environs.-A similar study has been made for the entire New York region, subdividing it into New York City and the balance outlying parts. In the environs there were about seven persons per vehicle in 1923 in contrast with 16 persons per vehicle in the city itself. In the entire area this figure has decreased from about 35 in 1916, to 11 in 1923. It appers that by the year 1935 there will be about 3.8 persons per (CI iE O 0 FU +0 r O +ot I~ FIG. 21 50 MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION AND PRODUCTION 51 motor vehicle in the entire area, as compared with 6.0 in New York City and 2.5 for the environs. A third diagram, Fig. 20, based on these figures, indicates the number of motor vehicles per 1,000 persons in the same three areas, 1916 to 1935, and indicates, as in the similar curves in Fig. 16, the great increase in the use of the automobile and a probable break in these curves, particularly in that for the environs, after the year 1930. As in the preceding calculations for future registration in New York City and its boroughs, that for the whole area is based on estimates for Motor Vehicle Registration in 1965.-A study of the curves in Figs. 18, 19, and 20 indicates that the number of persons per motor vehicle in the year 1965 may be reasonably assumed as follows: For New York City-five persons per motor vehicle, corresponding to 200 vehicles per 1,000 persons; For New York and environs-Three persons per motor vehicle, corresponding to 333 vehicles per 1,000 persons; For the environs-Two persons per motor vehicle, corresponding to. 500 vehicles per 1,000 persons. TABLE III.-MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS AND NUMBER OF PERSONS PER MOTOR VEHICLE, 1916 TO 1923, WITH ESTIMATES TO THE YEAR 1935 New York City Environs New York and its environs Registration PopulationPersons Registration Population Persons Registration Population Persons per car per car per car 1916 116,858 5,280,000 45.2 123,492 3,706,000 24.9 240,350 8,356,000 34.8 1917 132,926 5,360,000 40.3 156,781 3,152,000 20.1 289,707 8,512,000 29.4 1918 146,395 5,440,000 37.1 169,520 3,228,000 19.1 315,915 8,668,000 27.4 1919 187,258* 5,530,000 29.5 217,529 3,294,000 15.1 404,787 8,824,000 21.8 1920 225,185 5,620,048 25.0 243,953 3,359,007 13.8 469,138 8,979,055 19.1 1921 266,099 5,740,000 21.6 296,204 3,394,000 11.5 562,303 9,134,000 16.3 1922 313,723 5,860,000 18.7 381,383 3,434,000 9.0 695,106 9,294,000 13.4 1923 371,003 5,980,000 16.1 480,801 3,479,000 7.2 851,804 9,459,000 11.1 1925 488,000 6,200,000 12.7 670,000 3,600,000 5.4 1,158,000 9,800,000 8.5 1930 837,500 6,700,000 8.0 1,340,000 4,300,000 3.2 2,180,000 11,000,000 5.0 1935 1,190,000 7,120,000 6.0 1,960,000 4,880,000 2.5 3,150,000 12,000,000 3.8 * Estimated. NOTE: Population figures for years other than 1920 are estimated. future population obtained from Fig. 12 and for the estimated number of persons per motor vehicle. Registration figures for the whole area and its two subdivisions, from 1916 to 1935, are indicated in Fig. 21. This shows a total of 3,150,000 motor vehicles in 1935, of which about 38 per cent will be within New York City and 62 per cent in the balance of the area. Table III gives a summary of registration and number of persons per motor vehicle in the entire area and its two subdivisions, 1916 to 1923, with estimates up to the year 1935. There is indicated in Table IV the resulting change from 1922 to 1965 in the ratio of persons to motor vehicles for each of these classifications. The year 1922 is used rather than 1923, as it is the year for which the highway traffic map has been made. Figures for the counties on the edges of the area show that this ratio has been decreasing somewhat faster than in the rest of the environs, and a fourth classification was therefore added which would probably change from 7 to 1.5 persons per vehicle during the same period. 52 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS TABLE IV.-NUMBER OF PERSONS PER MOTOR VEHICLE, 1922, AND AS ESTIMATED FOR 1965 Persons Persons per per Ratio, Classification motor motor 1965 to vehicle, vehicle, 1922 1922 1965 1 New York City........ 18.7 5.267 2 New York and environs. 13.4 3.224 3 Environs.............. 9.0 2.222 4 Outer fringe of environs. 7.0 1.5.214 used for those outer counties already referred to. Actual 1922 registration figures were available for all of the counties in the area except Somerset, Morris, Middlesex and Monmouth, for which the registration was estimated from the motor vehicle tax returns from those counties. Fig. 22 shows the number of persons per motor vehicle in each county in 1922, and the corresponding figure obtained for the year 1965. In those few cases in the outlying counties where the ratios used above gave a lower value than \\ / 8LIQ ^V n,\ NEW cr SOMERSE \c 6 4.-4 NEW YORK ANr% ENVIRONS MO, e x S 9 o5 o - M10L ESSEX 52 SHOWING S '.. NUMBER OF PERSONS PER MOTOR VEHICLE 2.0 PON OF E9. I NGNCEmNs DaVISICN SEPT. 1924 FIG. 22 On account of the great variation within New York City, independent estimates for the boroughs were based on the curves for persons per motor vehicle, as shown in Figs. 14 and 15 (page 45); the second ratio was applied to 1922 figures for each of those counties immediately adjacent to New York City; the third ratio was applied to 1922 figures for a ring of counties still further from the central area; and the fourth ratio was 1.5, they have been adjusted to this minimum value. It appears that Nassau County, with only 3.7 persons per motor vehicle in 1922, had a far lower ratio than any county within the same distance of the center of the region and the second factor could therefore not be applied. It is estimated that there will be 1.7 persons per motor vehicle in this county in the year 1965. MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION AND PRODUCTION 53 The county registrations resulting from the figures in Fig. 22 and.the populations which have been estimated for each of the counties would indicate that in the year 1965 there might be a total registration of 6,720,000 motor vehicles within the entire area, or about 45 per cent of the total United States registration for the year 1923. The same figures for the various counties in New York City would indicate a total registration within the present limits of the city of about 2,260,000 in the year 1965, or more than six times the 1923 registration. These figures indicate very clearly one of the main features in the highway traffic problem in the New York region at the present time and point out the need for such constructive planning as will avoid intolerable congestion in the future. One of the factors which should be considered in looking ahead as far as the year 1965 is the possible development of some other type of motive power. It seems reasonable to expect that the automobile in some form has come to stay and that provision for it can be made without fear of its being superseded by an entirely different means of travel. As the gasoline supplies of the country approach depletion, and congestion increases the dangers from poisonous gases, the problem of providing other forms of motive power will be more intensively studied and will. in all probability be solved. If the poisonous gases can be eliminated, the problem in the most congested area will be simplified by the increased possibilities of underground transportation both under the waterways and possibly in some parts of Manhattan itself. III. MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENTS 1. General Statistics The increasing dangers to life and property resulting from the use of the automobile are clearly brought out by the statistics of motor vehicle accidents. The whole subject of the number, causes and costs of such accidents is discussed in While they relate only to conditions in Connecticut, such conditions are undoubtedly fairly typical of the entire New York region and are, therefore, very valuable in a study of the latter. Among the most interesting Connecticut statistics brought out in these proceedings is the?c fIII-r.-I.--I II-- - - - - -,--- n i1 10,000 9,000 8,000 0ooo 6,000 RELATION OF MOTOR VEHICLE FATALITIES TO REGISTRATION BASED UPON UNITED STATES NEW YORK STATE dc CITY DATA MARCH 1924. UNITED STATES * NEW YORK STATE - NEW YORK CITY o Izz -191 1/ 19?0 1 - 4 -LL E t L~ E _>uuu --- -- - - - - - _ _ _ - --- - - ^ - - - _ _ _ - - -- -- 4000 3,000 / 1O 4000 ----- ---- -- - - _ _ __-_ _ - ----- - -- -- - --0-- - Z,000 ----- --_ __ _ __ --- - 9(--9_ _ _ - -- --- _ (z 0oo --- - - --___- - -- -- - - -_9- - --0- - 6000 - -___1009- -19J Z700 -- 9(5-- 600 7 91 600 (9(6-- - -- - - -- - _ ___ 400 -400 '- - -- - --- - - - - - --- -- -- _ _ - _ - - - ------91 300 3 4 5 6 7 6 9 10 Z0 30 40 50 60 7080901000 2 Regi5strotion in Hundred Thousands FIG. 23 10,000 - 9,000 -,000 - 7000 6,000 5.000 4,000 3,000 1,000 900 600 700 600 500 400 300 00 great detail in the proceedings of the Conference on Motor Vehicle Traffic, arranged by the Hartley Corporation and held at New Haven, April 9, 10, and 11, 1924, under the joint auspices of Yale University and the State of Connecticut. These contain a very careful analysis of the statistics collected by the State Department of Motor Vehicles under Commissioner Stoeckel. fact that there was an accident for one car in every 12 during 1923, whereas in 1918 there was only an accident for one car in every 42. In the two years from 1921 to 1923 the number of accidents increased from 5 per cent to nearly 9 per cent of the registration. Threequarters of all the accidents reported were classified as due to some fault of the operator and 54 MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENTS 55 of these by far the greater part resulted from a disregard of the rules of the road. Considering only those accidents resulting in fatalities or serious injuries, about one-half of the total number reported are classified as due to the fault of operators. The force of the statistics which were presented is summarized by the following quotation: "Statistics of cold facts do not ordinarily appeal to people, but perhaps some of those which have been given will help to shock the people of this state into a realization of the terrible seriousness of motor vehicle accidents and to arouse a determination to reduce materially the number of these accidents." Complete accident statistics have also been recently collected by the Wisconsin Highway Commission, which check quite closely with the analysis of the Connecticut figures. They show that in 1922 and 1923 about 55 per cent of the total accidents can be attributed to reckless driving. A National Conference on Street and Highway Safety was held in Washington on December 15 and 16, 1924, called by the Department of Commerce. The Committee on Statistics appointed by the Secretary of Commerce reported as follows regarding the loss due to street and highway accidents: "In 1923 the loss in the United States due to street and highway accidents amounted to 22,600 human lives, 678,000 serious personal injuries and $600,000,000 economic loss, an increase of 80 per cent in the past seven years. About 85 per cent of these accidents were due to automobile traffic." Secretary Hoover, in his opening address, in referring to these statistics, said: "About 85 per cent of our street and highway accidents are due to the automobile, and while the rate of accidental deaths in our country from other causes has steadily decreased, due to better safety measures, yet during the past ten years our automobile accidents have doubled. This rate has even increased by about 14 per cent in the last year. While we must not underestimate the importance of the motor vehicle as a vital part of our transportation system as well as a means of recreation, we must approach this subject in terms of those who are injured." While quite complete statistics are available for New York City, there are no accurate sta tistics of accidents for the whole of the New York region. In order to arrive at a reasonable estimate of the number within this region, a relation has been established between registration and motor vehicle fatalities. There is shown in Fig. 23 the number of fatalities which occurred in the United States, New York State and New York City at different years, plotted as a function of the motor vehicle registration within the corresponding areas for the same year. It appears that the relation between fatalities and registration is a fairly definite one and can be represented by a straight line on double logarithmic paper. The equation of this line is No. of Fatalities =.073 (Registration)....(1) From this equation it may be safely stated that there were in the area of New York and its environs in 1923 about 2,030 fatalities from motor vehicle accidents. With an estimated registration of 3,150,000 in the year 1935, the present danger hazard would probably result in about 5,400 fatalities during that year. Table V gives the fatality and registration figures upon which both curve and equation were based. It is interesting to note that the death rate from motor vehicles in TABLE V.-RELATION BETWEEN AUTOMOBILE FATALITIES AND MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION Year Fatalities I United States 1917..................... 1918..................... 1919.................... 1920................... 1921..................... 1922....................... New York State 19 15.................... 1916..................... 1917.................... 1918.................... 1919..................... 1920..................... New York City 1917..................... 19 18..................... 1919..................... 1920..................... 1921.................... 1922..................... 1923.................... 9,184 9,672 9,827 11,358 12,500 14,000 659 729 837 1,189 1,388 1,107 441 503 696 730 851 846 934 Registration, excluding motorcycles 12,239,000 5,104,000 6,140,000 7,530,000 9,177,000 10,464,000 156,000 212,800 279,400 404,200 453,600 486,300 125,100 138,300 178,400 215,700 257,100 305,200 363,600 56 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS 1923 was five times as large as that from typhoid fever. It has long been recognized that expenditures of large sums of money for the elimination of typhoid fever is well justified, but people are only beginning to realize the importance of preventive work in connection with automobile accidents. The seriousness of the motor fatality situation can perhaps best be brought out by an analysis of money values. Assuming the conservative cost for a life of $4,000,1 the estimated 1923 fatalities in the entire area would represent a financial loss to the community of $8,120,000. This, 1,400C- - - - 1-,400 Diagram showing AUTOMOBILE FATALITIES lo00 IN -1200 NEW YORK CITY Jan. 1925 1,000 --- --------------1,000 4- - 0 - 600----------------------------800 400 --------------- 00 200 ----------00 E n - - - - - - / -- - - - - - - 0 from deaths alone would justify a very considerable expenditure. The great increase in the number of automobile fatalities in New York City from 1900 to 1924 is indicated in Fig. 24. It appears that there has been considerable annual variation in the rate of increase of such accidents, but in general they have followed a well-defined curve. The year 1923 with 934 fatalities was apparently a point above this curve and was, therefore, an excessively bad year in respect to such fatalities. Recent campaigns by the New York City Police Department for safety have apparently succeeded in reducing the rate of increase of such accidents. Statistics for 1924 indicate an actual decrease in the total number, but this may be due partly to a natural variation, and attempts must be continued to reduce motor vehicle hazards in order to make any permanent improvement. The curve has been extended to the year 1928 and indicates that with present tendencies there may be as many as 1,100 automobile fatalities within New York City during that year. 2. Accidents between Street Cars and Vehicles or Pedestrians Statistics have been furnished by the New York Transit Commission relative to the number of vehicles and number of persons struck by surface cars in New York City, 1914 to 1923. These are given in Table VI, referring to accidents between surface cars and vehicles, and Table VII, referring to accidents between surface cars and pedestrians, and bring out some interesting facts. The number of collisions with persons is steadily decreasing and in 1923 was only about 60 per cent of the number in 1914. On the other hand the number of collisions with vehicles has been steadily increasing and in 1923 was about 167 per cent of the number in 1914. This is partly explained by the fact that the number of vehicles has increased very much more rapidly than the number of pedestrians. There is also a difference in the time of year in which the maximum number of each type of accident occurs. For persons, this is during the summer months while for vehicles it is during the winter months. This would seem to indicate that the increased difficulty which vehicles have in navigating the.tS~-~trtttt~tt~~ 1900 1904 1908 1912 1916 1920 1924 1928 FIG. 24 capitalized at 6 per cent, would represent a total amount of more than $135,000,000. If it is possible to reduce the number of fatalities by any amount, say 20 per cent, this would mean that a corresponding percentage of the above sum could be expended in making physical improvements, such as widening narrow pavements, enlarging roadways on curves and at junctions, relieving excessive crowns, separating grade crossings, providing bridges and tunnels for pedestrians and installing traffic signs and signals. There are, of course, other economic losses which could be averted by such improvements. Those resulting 1 The Committee on Statistics of the National Conference on Street and Highway Safety estimated $5,000 as a most conservative figure for the cost of a life. MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENTS 57 streets under winter surface conditions increases the causes of collisions with surface cars in spite of the decrease in vehicular traffic during the winter months. within the limits of New York City was thoroughly covered in a report to the Transit Commission by Commissioner L. T. Harkness on October 25, 1923. TABLE VI.-NUMBER OF VEHICLES STRUCK BY SURFACE CARS IN NEW YORK CITY, 1914 TO 1923 INCLUSIVE (From data furnished by New York Transit Commission) BY MONTHS, ~~ ~ 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 Jan. 1,174 852 1,018 1.791 1,607 1,244 1,421 1,192 1,599 2,167 Feb. 1,522 971 1,376 1,446 1,317 1,114 1,537 1,418 1,372 1,678 Mar. 1,466 1,008 1,661 1,655 1,326 1,249 1,480 1,327 1,599 2,028 April 1,083 1,026 1,073 1,513 1,325 1,357 1,275 1,366 1,674 1,764 May 1,327 1,041 1,236 1,544 1,570 1,492 1,433 1,537 1,945 1,980 June 1,218 1,155 1,242 1,502 1,338 1,427 1,585 1,597 2,017 2,199 July 1,246 1,088 1,314 1,649 1,441 1,427 1,425 1,654 1,972 1,827 Aug. 1,251 1,060 1,318 1,546 1,305 1,268 1,557 1,632 1,975 2,087 Sept. 1,133 1,153 1,282 1,424 1,137 1,322 1,281 1,680 2,043 2,136 Oct. 1,125 1,289 1,958 1,720 1,272 1,393 1,780 1,620 1,963 2,330 Nov. 1,009 1,159 2,189 1,416 1,266 1,356 1,397 1,588 1,921 2,191 Dec. 1,058 1,510 2,313 1,967 1,293 1,369 1,610 1,643 2,055 1,985 Total 14,612 13,312 17,980 19,173 16,197 16,018 17,781 18,254 22,135 24,372 NOTE.-The figures in heavy type represent the maximum for each year. TABLE VII.-NUMBER OF PERSONS STRUCK BY SURFACE CARS IN NEW YORK CITY, BY MONTHS, 1914 TO 1923 INCLUSIVE (From data furnished by New York Transit Commission) Jan. Feb. Mar. April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Total 1914 229 176 282 289 353 314 327 304 275 269 260 249 3,327 1915 206 257 306 322 257 264 253 258 230 246 214 230 3,043 1916 206 180 227 236 270 222 226 212 170 257 271 299 2,776 1917 285 207 305 296 309 286 267 236 237 286 195 188 3,097 1918 180 179 235 257 283 220 208 170 192 159 180 189 2,452 1919 199 199 239 245 251 214 199 160 162 172 140 133 2,313 1920 131 113 140 184 187 198 160 149 119 171 161 198 1,911 1921 147 154 171 205 208 150 158 149 147 188 167 153 1,997 1922 119 135 177 158 186 166 170 138 150 171 156 162 1,888 1923 146 125 185 180 205 162 154 129 163 177 184 170 1,980 NOTE.-The figures in heavy type represent the maximum for each year. 3. Accidents at Railroad Grade Crossings One class of motor vehicle accidents for which a definite solution can be obtained is that resulting from accidents at railroad grade crossings. In certain parts of the New York region such crossings have been very largely eliminated, particularly on the New York, New Haven and Hartford, Pennsylvania Main Line, and Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroads. The entire problem of grade crossing elimination Table VIII has been furnished by the New York Transit Commission and shows the number of persons killed or injured in grade crossing accidents in New York City, 1914 to 1923. This indicates that while the total number of persons injured and killed had been gradually reduced from 39 in 1914 to 21 in 1921, it had mounted again to a total of 38 in the year 1923. A considerable number of the grade crossings in the borough of Queens are eliminated by the recon 58 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS struction work started during the year 1924 by the Long Island Railroad east of Jamaica. The great seriousness of the present situation in this and other parts of the city is well recognized, but there are many complications in the financing of the necessary elimination projects. The map in Fig. 25 shows the location of motor vehicle accidents at railroad grade crossings in still more forcibly before the public. Among the most serious of these was that which occurred near Calvary Cemetery in Queens County, New York, on January 28th, at which three persons were killed and four injured, and another at East Moriches, Suffolk County, New York, on June 15th at which one person was killed and five were injured. TABLE VIII.-PERSONS KILLED OR INJURED IN GRADE CROSSING ACCIDENTS FROM 1914 TO 1923 INCLUSIVE (From data furnished by New York Transit Commission) IN NEW YORK CITY Killed 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 New York Central Railroad....... 0 3 0 0 0 3 1 0 1 0 Long Island Railroad.......... 6 5 3 3 13 7 6 3 3 14 Staten Island Rapid Transit...... 5 3 1 2 2 1 2 2 3 5 NewYork Rapid Transit Corporation 2 1 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 Total......................... 13 12 6 6 17 11 9 5 7 20 Injured New York Central Railroad....... Long Island Railroad............. Staten Island Rapid Transit....... NewYork Rapid Transit Corporation Total........................ 4 12 2 0 18 the New York and environs area during the year 1923, and the number of persons killed or injured in these accidents. A summary of the data shown on this map is given in Table IX. The map clearly indicates that there are several parts of the area where this problem is most acute, particularly in the southern part of Nassau County, New York, and in the vicinities of Paterson and Perth Amboy, New Jersey. The benefit to those areas already referred to where grade crossings have been very largely eliminated is clearly indicated in the drawing. There have been several very serious accidents at railroad grade crossings during the year 1924 which have brought this phase of the question TABLE IX.-MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENTS AT RAILROAD GRADE CROSSINGS, NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS, 1923 Total accidents That part of N. Y. State included... That part of New Jersey included.. That part of Connecticut included 114 180 Accidents without personal injury 82 113 2 197 Number of persons injured 74 78 1 153 Number of persons killed 28 28 1 57 S 4 Total.......... 298 NEW YORi'K.l.AND 'ENVIRON:S VEHIICULAR ACCIDENTS AT RAILROAD GRADE CROSSINGS during [923 SCALE IN: Jw(Ir / i/ i~-r I o 1: ''I ':-- I 0: i--~ i h I i I' i i L ~ d o,0 0I FlatE r~P, C~rYJk -H.; 1 (i:-~ 1~~0 01 y 0 1 ~~ 1 ~n; 000oo 9~ a e'~0 I REGIONAL PLAN OFrEWYORK AND TI5EoNVIR ONS uCNHlt.rHINO NVIVISION FIG. 25 I II iiI FIG. 26 STREETS AND SIDEWALKS BLOCKED BY TRUCKS UNLOADING AT THE CURB Typical views in wholesale district, borough of Manhattan, New York City. FIG. 27 PROVISION FOR UNLOADING WITHIN PROPERTY LINES Upper picture shows provision made by a U. S. Post Office in Manhattan contrasted with lack of such provision. Lower picture shows a building on one of Manhattan's busiest avenues, with arcaded driveway leading to interior court. (See page 95) (See page 95) IV. CONGESTION RESULTING FROM PRESENT CONDITIONS 1. The Causes of Traffic Congestion and Importance of Their Removal The meaning of the term "congestion" as applied to traffic conditions in this report is that degree of overcrowding of vehicles in streets that obstructs freedom of circulation, with attendant consequences of economic waste and inconvenience. Congestion is sometimes claimed as an advantage, and eminent engineers have declared it to be one of the attractions and reasons for prosperity of New York. This claim, however, is probably due to a misunderstanding of terms, by thinking of congestion as mere concentration or crowding instead of overcrowding. Before we can ascertain what are the proper remedies to apply to relieve overcrowding, we have to understand the causes from which it springs, and we have to apply remedies orwhat is more important-preventive measures to remove these causes, if we are to achieve anything in the nature of permanent relief. It has of course to be recognized that a degree of relief that could be described as a solution of the problem of traffic congestion is probably unattainable. There can be no finality in any project put forward as the solution of the problems of traffic and transit in the modern city, so long as the city continues to grow and changing factors continue to operate in producing new conditions. One thing that stands out clearly as a result of past experience is the need of considering the problem on broad and general lines simultaneously with the study of its local phases. The cause of congestion in a particular locality may have its origin in some defect of the plan of the city at a considerable distance from the point of congestion that can be traced only by careful investigation over wide areas. On the other hand, it may be the result of such minor causes as defective paving or bad regulation; or it may be merely a temporary ailment needing very simple treatment. Where, however, congestion is persistent and extends over a considerable period of the day, it will be found that it is likely to arise as a result of a defective street system 59 over a wide radius, or from excessive height and bulk of buildings in a neighborhood, or from a combination of both of these things. It is impossible to give any general statement of causes that would be applicable to all conditions of congestion. There is a variety of forms of congestion, and each form may be the result of several distinct causes. Hence the number and complexity of the things that produce or accentuate congestion are too great to make anything less than comprehensive and carefully studied treatment worth while. The problem has to be studied not only in its local aspects but also in relation to the whole plan of the city. It follows that there is no simple method by which effective relief can be found, and no relief that can be regarded as a permanent cure. There must be constant planning in regard to this as in regard to other phases of civic growth so long as this growth continues. Making wider or more streets, or restricting the volume and movements of traffic, may remove some of the worst effects and provide temporary relief for circulation, but if carried out alone without any restriction on building uses, heights and densities or any comprehensive plan of the arterial system of highways, such measures would involve prohibitive cost if they were to be made really effective as remedies of congestion. It may be assumed in any consideration of the cause of congestion that everything that will facilitate the free movement of traffic, including the legitimate and reasonable use of streets for standing vehicles, is necessary for public convenience and business efficiency. Therefore prohibitive measures that restrict movement, such as one-way streets or elimination of reasonable parking, are necessary although undesirable. They are a price which every crowded community has to pay for the neglect of making a comprehensive plan of communications in consonance with an adequate zoning plan prepared in advance of development, and with due regard to the trends of future growth. 60 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS There are several factors which result directly or indirectly in causing traffic congestion, including(a) Narrow streets forming traffic thoroughfares inherited from former times; (b) Building heights too great for the capacity of the adjacent streets; (c) The lack of zoning with reference to use, height and bulk of buildings, which would prevent the creation of traffic congestion, especially at morning, noon and evening hours; (d) The lack of platting ordinances which would prevent the creation of bad subdivisions, with the principal traffic streets too narrow for their ultimate use; (e) The inadequacy or infrequency of arterial thoroughfares both present and proposed; (f) The congestion at street junctions and intersections resulting from inadequate space for circulation and insufficient control of the traffic crossing such intersections, or from unsuitable design of roadways; (g) The extensive establishment of one-way streets resulting in added congestion by increasing the length of travel required between two fixed points and therefore increasing the number of cars on the streets at a given time; (h) The lack of a comprehensive plan within which can be included each of the several creative and preventive measures suggested above, and by means of which the problem of circulation can be dealt with by systematic treatment over wide regional areas and properly related to the uses and bulks of buildings. The causes of congestion referred to under (f) require somewhat more detailed explanation. In regard to the inadequacy of space at street junctions it is frequently more important to provide wider pavements at such places than is comprised in the combined roadways than to widen the approach roads before they converge. This is, of course, particularly true where the congestion in the longitudinal approaches is the result of the slowing up of traffic at the junctions. In so far as the causes relate to traffic control this includes the influence of left-hand turns and the regulations for movement of traffic turning into the avenue, such as making such traffic line up along the curb, and the question whether it can turn the corner during motion on the avenue or must wait for cross traffic to proceed. Where one or more of the intersecting streets have wide roadways, safety islands, serving for the convenience of pedestrians, and as a guide to traffic turning the corners, should be very carefully designed. In many cases recently the radius of curb corners has been increased so as to make them correspond more nearly with the radius on which an automobile can turn. The most suitable radius is a matter of considerable discussion. It should be large enough to permit the car to remain close to the curb, but not so large as to encourage turning the corners at dangerous speeds. 2. Cost of Congestion Efficient municipal administration would obviously expend funds for relief of traffic congestion in proportion to the losses involved. While no careful estimates have been made, as far as known, with reference to points within the New York region, some idea can be secured with reference to probable losses by comparison with other municipalities where such estimates have been carefully made. In Worcester, Mass., detailed traffic tallies were made of all vehicles which entered the central business district, the number of each license and the time of entry and leaving being noted. From these data, and considering only those vehicles which were obviously delayed in passing through the central district, an estimate was prepared of the costs of congestion to the community. It amounted to $35,000 per day. In Cincinnati studies were made of the speed at which vehicles could traverse the central business district on each of its streets, hour by hour, throughout a business day. Rough estimates of the time which certain recommended changes in traffic regulations would save to the vehicles which, according to traffic counts, made use of the streets indicated that approximately $100,000 per day was the cost of the congestion. In Chicago certain estimates have been made with reference to the cost to the community of permitting cars to park within the "loop district," and $200,000 per day is approximately the figure reached. Judged by the total amount of traffic in these various communities compared CONGESTION RESULTING FROM PRESENT CONDITIONS 61 with New York, it would seem safe to estimate the cost of congestion on Manhattan Island at $500,000 per day, and the cost in the whole region to approximate $1,000,000 per day. 3. Concentration in Central Part of the Area Persons.-Inasmuch as that part of Manhattan south of 59th Street contains, at the pres were available only for different years. An estimate was therefore made for the latest year for which statistics were available, and a correction was added, based upon a study of past changes, to bring all these figures down to conditions for the year 1924. The number of persons traveling on a typical business day is assumed to be 1/320th of the total for the year. Where such totals in From North of 59th Street, 859,300 = 2920%/. From n59thSt Brooklyn & Queens, New Jersey, i (induding all L.I. traffic) *dents, 315,3 00 10.70/6. ransients. 74300 =E54o. 4 2) 70061.4. Fro aten Isla 39,200 = 370. DIAGRAM SHOWING SOURCES OF DAY POPULATION OF BOROUGH OF MANHATTAN - SOUTH OF 59th STREET ON TYPICAL BUSINESS DAY - 1924 ESTIMATED TOTAL POPULATION P,941,700 REGIONAL PLAN oF AREA 8.35 SQUARE MILES NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS DENSITY 352,000 PERSONS PER SQUARE MILE EMINEERIN& DIVISION FIG. 28 ent time, the principal business, wholesale and retail centers, as well as a very large part of the resident population, it might well be considered the hub of New York and its environs. To illustrate the difficulties in dealing with this section Table X and the accompanying diagrams have been prepared. Statistics for the various factors elude persons both entering and leaving the district, 1/640th of the annual total was taken. The total 1924 business day population of this area is estimated at 2,941,700, of whom 982,000 are either residents remaining in the area or transients. This is intended to represent the number of persons who would be within the 62 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS TABLE X.-DAY POPULATION OF MANHATTAN SOUTH OF 59TH STREET ON A TYPICAL BUSINESS DAY IN 1924 ORIGIN ESTIMATED NUMBER Residents remaining in area.. 940,000 Transients................. 42,000 other and that the totals given in the, last columns of the table are sufficiently accurate for any purpose. Figs. 28 and 29 illustrate in map and graphic form the composition of this day population. As the total area of this part of Manhattan is about 8.35 square miles, this indicates an average density of 352,000 persons per square mile, or about 550 persons per acre. From above 59th StreetGrand Central Terminal.. 42,000 By Vehicles crossing 59th St. 99,000 By Surface Lines crossing 59th St................ 78,600 By Interboro Rapid Transit, excluding estimated number from New Jersey by Fort Lee and Dyckman St. Ferries............... 639,700 From Brooklyn and Queens, including all Long Island trafficEast River Ferries......... 19,900 Long Island Railroad to Pennsylvania Station.... 34,800 By Queensboro Bridge, excluding Rapid Transit... 24,000 Other East River Bridges, all types of traffic......... 386,400 Interboro Rapid Transit from Brooklyn............... 111,300 Rapid Transit Lines, via Queensboro Bridge and 42d and 60th St. Tunnels 67,500 Brooklyn-Manhattan Transit Tunnel from Brooklyn 102,000 From Staten Island, by Ferry'....... From New JerseyWeehawken Ferry passengers................... 33,000 Passengers on other ferries south of Weehawken..... 92,000 By Vehicles on all above ferries.............. 23,700 Pennsylvania Station...... 700 Hudson & Manhattan Tubes 151,000 Via Fort Lee and Dyckman St. Ferries............. 14,900 982,000 859,300 745,900 39,200 DAY POPULATION MANHATTAN-SOUTH OF 59"!E ST. ON TYPICAL BUSINESS DAY-1924 REGIONAL PLAN or NEW YORK AND N1 1 111 rrT5 ENVIRONS. tMWANCERL1 OhnSIOHM FIG. 29 The total number of persons which entered this same area during twenty-four hours on a typical business day in 1924 has been estimated as 2,853,100, almost half of whom crossed 59th Street from the north. The 893,400 persons included in this figure, in excess of the 1,959,700 persons shown in Table X as coming from outside of the area and forming part of the day population, represent those entering at night plus the through traffic. The detailed movement of these persons will be a matter for consideration in the transit and transportation study. 315,300 Total.........................2,941,700 area within those two or three hours of the day during which most of the business is concentrated. It is believed that any small errors there may be in the detailed figures will balance each CONGESTION RESULTING FROM PRESENT CONDITIONS 63 Railroad Traffic.-The figures at the various railroad terminals and for the Hudson River railroad ferries were taken from statistics of the New York Transit Commission. The number of persons entering the area was assumed as 1/640th of the total ticket sales, while the day population was taken as 1/640th of the school, family and commutation ticket sales. All local ferry passengers on these ferries were included in the day population. Rapid Transit Traffic.-In order to determine what part of the total rapid transit traffic entered this area, the average length of haul was computed from typical trip counts made on the Bronx and Manhattan lines by the Transit Commission in 1921. This average haul was found to be 5.5 miles, which corresponds very closely with similar figures obtained by the borough of Manhattan from statistics for the years 1911 to 1914. For the lines entering from the north, the total ticket sales at all stations between 59th Street and points 5.5 miles north of that point is assumed to represent the total trips into the area from all rapid transit lines to the north. In Brooklyn, special conditions created by the large amount of short haul traffic, largely due to interchange from the Atlantic Avenue railroad station, made necessary independent assumptions of the proportion of this short haul traffic which should be included. Rapid transit traffic over the East River bridges was based upon 24-hour counts made by the Department of Plant and Structures in November, 1922. Two-thirds of the total number of people entering the area by rapid transit lines were included in the day population. Passengers in Vehicles.-Vehicular counts from the East River bridges were based upon the 24 -hour counts of the Department of Plant and Structures in- 1922. Similar counts for the Hudson River ferries were obtained from the Port of New York Authority. The number of vehicles entering across 59th Street was computed from Police Department traffic counts in 1922. One person was assumed for each motor truck or horse-drawn vehicle and 134 persons for each passenger automobile. Surface Line Passengers.-In 1921 the Transit Commission made a count which included the total number of trolley passengers leaving that part of Manhattan south of 59th Street for points further north. It was assumed that this also represented the number of people going in the reverse direction and two-thirds of the total was included in the day population. Surface line passengers from Brooklyn and Queens were given in the counts of the Department of Plant and Structures and the same ratio was applied to these for obtaining day population. Transients.-The estimate for transients was based upon the probable number of transients in the hotels in the area on a typical business day, such data being received from the New York Hotel Association. Vehicles.-Fig. 30 shows the one-way distribution of vehicles which it is estimated entered that part of Manhattan south of 59th Street during 24 hours on a typical business day in 1924. The traffic entering from the north is separated into that on the east and west sides and shows a considerable excess on the east due to the influence of Fifth and Park Avenues. The relative importance, from a traffic standpoint, of the East River bridges is clearly shown, the Manhattan Bridge coming first, the Queensboro Bridge second, the Williamsburg Bridge third, and the Brooklyn Bridge, with only horse-drawn vehicles, is almost negligible. The total number of vehicles is estimated at 204,750. The total traffic on the Queensboro Bridge was in 1924 very nearly equal to that on the Manhattan Bridge, but only that part of the former is shown in this diagram as was assumed to enter the district south of 59th Street. A close check on the estimated amount and distribution of this vehicular traffic is furnished by a comparison with counts over the same bridges and ferries included in the two-way 12-hour counts made by the borough of Manhattan, May 28, 1924, at all points of entrance to and exit from the borough. The distribution of all north and south vehicular traffic on those Manhattan avenues intersecting 14th, 42d, and 59th Streets is shown in Figs. 31 and 32. These are based on Police Department counts taken in December, 1922, at 42d Street, and in January, 1923, at 14th and 59th Streets. The 14th and 59th Street counts 64 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS were for a 12-hour period, and those at 42d Street, which were for an 11-hour period, have been corrected to the same basis. The diagrams indicate clearly the intensive use of the central avenues at 42d and 59th Streets. At 14th Street the distribution is much more uniform. All of the hours are represented in these maximum figures except 7 to 8 a. m. and 6 to 7 p. m. The maximum individual count was southbound on Fifth Avenue at 42d Street, between 12 m. and 1 p. m., and was 1,533 vehicles per hour. The maximum varies from about 1.2 to 2.5 times From North of 59" Street 132,800 = 64.9% 0C0 J^l h V ia Queensboro Br. From New Jersey, 16,600 By Ferries(S.of 59"St.) By Ferries 15,150 = 7.4% 2,340 From e ~r,Brooklyn &Queens S3,900 (Including all L..Traffc) \: i55,600=27.1% DIAGRAM SHOWING VEHICLES ENTERING BOROUGH OF MANHATTAN - SOUTH OF 591" STREET DURING 24 HOURS ON A TYPICAL BUSINESS DAY - 1924 ESTIMATED TOTAL VEHICLES 204,750 REGIONAL PLAN i- SCALE OF VEHICLES NEW YORKFA.N ITS ENVIRONS ~ "-' ""' . m FIG. 30 In order to indicate the maximum intensity of traffic on these same north and south avenues of Manhattan the two additional diagrams, Figs. 33 and 34, were prepared to show the maximum number of vehicles within any one hour of the same traffic counts and the hour in which the maximum occurred. There is also indicated for comparison the average hourly traffic for the twelve hours, 7 a. m. to 7 p. m., over which the counts were taken. the average, the greatest variation being indicated in northbound counts on Sixth Avenue at 59th Street and the least variation in northbound counts on Third, Park and Madison Avenues at 42d Street. Curves showing the hourly variation on each of the avenues will be found on page 75 under Periodical Variation of Traffic. Estimates have been made of the numbers of vehicles upon the streets of Manhattan- as shown O O o O O tri Cr) H tz tr (I H 0, REGIONAL NORTH BOUND VEHICULAR TRAFFIC - MANHATTAN PLAN OF NEW YORX AND ITS ENVIRONS 2 HOUR PERIOD FROM 7A.M. TO 7P.M. AS OF JANUARY 1923 BEN,51NttCOU DWGoN3 FIG. 31 FIG. 32 ON 0.: V > z -.14Ti PLAN OF NEW YORK ANO ITS ENVIRONS 06 CL: I I a: 01 C> CQ cu4 Y TRAFIC OUNT TAKE N BY 0 POLICE DEPARTMENT >:, > 0! 500 11,000,00o?0c1 'N Z 1> NUNBER OF VEHICLES V V 0 z- a: VAVEIILASE > 0 z ~z0 co z.00 2 0__. MAXIMU NUBRO>EILSI NHU BETWEEN 7A.M. To 7RM. AS OF JANUARY 1923 DOO PLl r') 'E ~ ~ o~I- " w. 01 y ItU If 4F 0 01100 0 NORTH BOUND VEHICULAR TRAFFIC -MANHATTAN MAXIMUM NUMBER OF VEHICLES IN AN HOUR BETrWEEN 7A.M. TO '7PM. AS OF JANUARY 1923 PLAN OF NEWI YORK 0AN0 ITS ENVIRONS FIG.. 33 Pc. 33FIG. 34 CONGESTION RESULTING FROM PRESENT CONDITIONS 67 by the aeroplane map made in 1921 supplemented by detailed observations made in 1924. It is estimated that there were at one time during August, 1921, approximately 40,500 vehicles upon the streets of Manhattan, of which total about 62 per cent were in the district south of while that in New York City has increased 61.7 per cent. A reasonable assumption would be that the registration influencing the traffic in the borough of Manhattan has increased about 45 per cent. If the number of vehicles upon Manhattan streets has increased in the same ratio, Dia9gram showing OBSERVED RELATIONS BETWEEN VOLUME AND SPEED OF VEHICULAR TRAFFIC ON TYPICAL STREETS IN TME BOROUGH OF MANHATTAN, NEW YORK CITY OCTOBER AND NOVEMBER, 1924 * Averoage Capaciy Curve for Various Velocities Figures Indicate Number of Observations o Averaoge Velocity Curve for Various Copaci-ies Tol-al Number of Observations Mode 983 1,100 --I I I I I I I 1 '00 C1,00 9C 80 L7 0 T0 30 L 7C 40 0 5o C 5C C 4 10 1 5 o -------- r -1,000 0 0 C--- --- -___ ___ ___ S2o6300,0-- - - ----------------------------_ 1 I 1 6 I 3 I o I I 4 3 8- 6 101 5 6 5 6 3 4 1 3 1 I5. I I SI 613\65 6 8 8 3 6 3 1 1 ~0 - - - -- - - --I 5 2 2-- - -- - - --4- - - - -- - - 1 1- 00 4 T 13 4 6 6 G 2 3 3 Z 4 4 8 9 9 7 2 9 3 0 - - j4- -- - - I - ^ = = = = = = = = I_ ==== -- -- -- -- 0 0 4 8 3 12 5 o I 8 9 7 5 4 3 1 2 3 4 3 8 G 10 21 17 1o ) 6 16 15 6 10 3 7 I 1 I 1 o 1 3 5 7 16 18 14 o 1 11 IZ 8 E 6 I I I co L1 1 1 6 9 7 9 T 4 7 2 6 4 4 2 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 T 8 9 0 11 10 it 18 10 20? 22 23 24!5 26 Velocity in Miles per Hour FIG. 35 59th Street. Several independent estimates indicated that about 40 per cent of this total, or 16,000, represented moving vehicles. During the three years from 1921 to 1924, estimated 1924 figures indicate that the motor vehicle registration in Manhattan has increased 30.2 per cent, this would mean that under 1924 conditions there were as many as 58,700 vehicles upon the streets of Manhattan at one time and about 23,500 of these were moving vehicles. During October and November, 1924, 983 different observations were made of the volume and 68 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS speed of vehicles on typical streets in the borough of Manhattan. These observations were spread over the business hours and each one represents the average results over a stretch of roadway from four-tenths of a mile to one mile in length. The results of these observations are indicated in Fig. 35, in which the number of vehicles has been reduced to those within a moving lane of traffic. A curve for theoretical capacity with tower traffic regulation, developed later in this report, has also been added. It appears that in a few cases the number of vehicles has exceeded this theoretical capacity, but only with the reduction of the velocity to less than six miles per hour. Between velocities of six and ten miles per hour the maximum observations follow this theoretical curve, and where there were higher velocities it appears that the streets were not being used to theoretical capacity, but carried an average traf fic of about 200 vehicles per moving lane per hour. The average weighted velocity of all the observations made was 11.3 miles per hour, and it appears that with this velocity many of the streets were carrying between 150 and 500 vehicles per lane per hour. Outside of these limits there was a decrease in average velocity as the traffic increased and an increase in average velocity on those streets where there was less traffic. The maximum speeds were obtained on those avenues where the small number of vehicles required few traffic stops. On Fifth Avenue south of 59th Street the average speed maintained between points eight or nine blocks apart was only between 5.4 and 10.5 miles per hour. The average speeds maintained throughout the individual routes varied from a maximum of 15.3 miles per hour to a minimum of 7.8 miles per hour. V. THE RELATION. OF MOTOR BUSES AND SURFACE TRANSIT LINES TO HIGHWAY TRAFFIC There are many sides to the problems of motor bus and surface car service. Certain people maintain that the surface car is doomed and should be replaced immediately; others state that the motor bus should not be allowed to operate in competition with the surface car and, finally, there are those who advocate the use of the bus to supplement the service of the trolley. The following data have been collected as an aid in studying these questions. In the area under consideration there are two cities, Newark, New Jersey, and Bridgeport, Connecticut, which stand out most prominently as battlegrounds between buses and surface cars. In these two communities there is no doubt that the competition has been both uneconomical and wasteful. The 1924 edition of "Facts and Figures of the Automobile Industry," published by the National Automobile Chamber of Commerce, lists only the following electric railway companies as operating motor buses within the region: the Connecticut Company and the Bethel and Danbury Street Railway Company in Connecticut and the Public Service Railway Company in New Jersey. In New York City certain traction companies, i. e., the Third Avenue Railway Company, the Interborough Rapid Transit Company, and the Brooklyn-Manhattan Transit Company, have during 1924 applied for franchises to operate bus lines. At the time of these applications certain motor buses were operated in the City of New York by the Fifth Avenue Coach Company, and others under the supervision of the Department of Plant and Structures. In other parts of the region there are numerous bus routes operated by various companies and individuals. There is one place in the region where an electric railway company has entirely replaced its surface cars with motor buses. This was done by the Newburgh Public Service Corporation, formerly Orange County Traction Company, which operated 32 buses in 1924 with a fare of seven cents. On December 31, 1924, the Nassau County Railway Company ceased operation of TABLE XI.-DIMENSIONS OF SURFACE CARS AND MOTOR BUSES IN NEW YORK CITY SURFACE CARS Square Lineal Height feet per feet per SaboveArea, Square passen- Lineal passenType Length Width of Seats square feet ger, 100 feet ger, 100 rail feet per seat per cent per seat per cent over- overload load Third Avenue cross seat......... 43' 0" 8' 31".. 48 356.47 7.43 3.72 0.90 0.45 One-man.................... 22' 4" 7' 8.. 30 171.27 5.71 2.86 0.74 0.37 Brooklyn center entrance........ 45' 8" 8' 5y" 11' O2" 59 386.37 6.55 3.28 0.77 0.39 Brooklyn new Peter Witt........ 44' 6" 8' 0" 10' 6" 47 356.00 7.57 3.79 0.94 0.47 New York Railways double deck.. 44' 0" 8' 3" 12' 114" 79a 363.00 4.60 2.30 0.56 0.28 50 per 50 per cent cent MOTOR BUSEs overload overload Municipal (New York City)...... 26' 0" 7' 4".. 30 190.58 6.35 4.24 0.87 0.57 Fifth Avenue bus double-deck.... 24' 434" 7' 4" 13' 6" 51 178.85 3.50.. 0.48 a Seats for 38 on upper deck and 41 below. 69 70 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS its trolley line between Sea Cliff and Glen Cove, Long Island, and filed an application to go out of business. Table XI gives dimensions of surface cars and motor buses used in New York City, and the as the unit, that of the Fifth Avenue bus is 70 per cent greater, and those of the surface cars are from 57 to 164 per cent greater. In area occupied the buses are slightly above the unit, while the surface cars have areas more than twice as great. 200 150 100 50 0 ro -50 U q) -c -C 4.i: 4:, 000 u u- c ~( -c - 2 Q) Q) CL4.- t o Q 0 O L: ^ 2: o 0 <- <0cFIG. 36 diagram in Fig. 36 shows a comparison between the various types of surface cars and motor buses, taking the one-man trolley as a unit. Compared with this unit the buses are slightly longer, while the two-man surface cars are about twice as long. The municipal bus has the same seating capacity In area per seat the Fifth Avenue bus and the double-deck trolley are respectively 39 and 19 per cent less than the unit, while the others are from 11 to 33 per cent greater. In the case of overloading as indicated, the area per passenger of the double-deck trolley is 20 per cent MOTOR BUSES AND SURFACE TRANSIT LINES 71 below the unit, while those of the others are from 16 to 48 per cent greater. The diagram indicates also the comparisons in length per seat, and in length per passenger with the same overloads as used for area pel passenger. The curves in Fig. 37 indicate the annual number of revenue passengers carried in New York and its environs by typical surface car and motor bus operators during the years from 1914 to 1923. It is indicated that within this period the business handled by the surface car lines has remained practically stationary. All of the four companies shown had slight increases and de The curves for motor bus traffic show, on the contrary, a remarkably steady growth. The total number of passengers carried by the Fifth Avenue Coach Company in 1923 was about five times the number carried in 1914. The business of the buses operating out of Newark has shown a still greater increase, the number carried in 1923 being about twelve times that carried in 1917. During the year 1923 the buses operated in that part of Connecticut being studied carried about 9,965,000 passengers, of whom about 9,520,000 were carried by buses in the city of Bridgeport. 6,000,000. _ ~ -,u 4,000 - -- - 14,000 3,000 - 3,000 2,000 [-- - --I - - 2,000 1,000 -------- ---~8y Surface Cars, New York Cry ------- - - 1.000 00 4 00 40y Surface Cors of Public Servic Ry. CO of New Jersey 200 200 100 ' A- 1 T _ ~00 40 ______ ____i r 4=40 'he Connectic C _Airec -0 eoacaol 50 40 %Surface CarsO ~ --- - 1 ocJ i- e Diogram Showing 0 f S^^- ^" REVENUE PASSENGERS CARRIED by the 0 LARGER OPERATORS or 10 SURFACE CARS AND MOTOR BUSES IN NEW YORK &- ITS ENVIRONS 5 Dec.1924 5 4 NoTc: Changes in Fare System by Connecticut Co. 4 3 -----Su-fae after Nov.1,1919 make later Figures incomparable. Caro Of Danbu&r I?- ret reer R. Co. 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 FIG. 37 creases within this period. The decreases in New York City apparently had some connection with the World War period, whereas the New Jersey lines and those of the Connecticut Company showed a slight increase during the early part of the war, probably as a result of increased activity in connection with the manufacture of munitions. The decrease in the business of the Public Service Railway Company of New Jersey in 1923 was caused largely by the trolley strike which occurred during that year; there were also, during recent years, some changes in their fare system which may be reflected in the figures. In the last ten years the miles of new construction of trolley lines has been relatively small, while a very large percentage of the bus lines now in operation have come into existence since 1914. It seems quite evident that there will be no great increase in the mileage of surface transit lines during the next forty years. Where these now exist on main arterial routes they offer considerable obstruction to motor vehicle traffic. In making any estimates for the future vehicular capacity of such roads a similar interference must be allowed for if they are to continue to be used for the transportation of passengers by some 72 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS form of transit, whether by trolleys or motor buses. There is a tendency for the trolley lines on such routes to obtain private rights-of-way where they can operate to much greater effi In order to indicate the influence of trolleys and motor buses on the distribution of vehicular traffic within a street, Fig. 38 has been prepared based upon observations made on typical streets LEGEND Passeng Buses E Trucks SHorse c m Street jer Cars 1,000 900 800 lrawn Vehicles Cars Bo u, L a0 E z 700 w 600 500 400 300 -42?NDSOSTREET 100 5 86h&6thAve. 2 Hours,P.M. Nov.O Z,19 4 4 - Street Car r - "E Tracks 1- o -_j a- -J N MADISON AVE be-. 39" 8h 40thSt./.. 2Hours,P.M. Nov. 19,\924.t' Moving Lanes Es - Q) u 7) 4 -0 L 5) E D z " Moving Lanes E. jEI FIG. 38 INFLUENCE OF TROLLEYS AND MOTOR BUSES ON DISTRIBUTION OF VEHICULAR TRAFFIC WITHIN A STREET Based on observations on typical streets in the borough of Manhattan. ciency. If this cannot be done, and increased capacity is required, additional parallel routes should be provided for through automobile traffic. in the borough of Manhattan. It appears that street car tracks within the center of a roadway greatly reduce the availability of this part of a street for motor traffic. The trolley cars in the MOTQR BUSES AND SURFACE TRANSIT LINES 73 case shown take space which might be used by about 3.1 times as many motor vehicles. The diagram for Fifth Avenue conditions indicates that motor buses do not pre-empt as much space as do the trolley cars, but they appear to occupy the space which might be taken by about 1.4 times as many passenger cars. The relatively limited use that can be made of the parking lanes, even with a twenty-minute parking limit such as was in existence when these counts were made, is clearly indicated. There are two special conditions which should be taken into consideration in applying these diagrams. In Madison Avenue a recently refilled ditch just west of the center of the roadway tended to crowd southbound traffic toward the west side of the street. In the Fifth Avenue diagram the large amount of traffic in the lane adjacent to the east curb can be accounted for by the fact that a large number of these cars were preparing to turn east on' 46th Street, which furnished the first easterly connection to Park Avenue north of the Grand Central Station. In the central part of the area operation has been abandoned on several surface transit lines, particularly in the southern part of the borough of Manhattan. In the year 1921, Daniel L. Turner, Consulting Engineer to the Transit Commission, made an excellent study for the re routing of trolley traffic on Manhattan Island by abandoning several existing routes and concentrating this type of traffic on the remaining routes. As such suggestions were naturally opposed by those companies holding franchises to operate trolleys on those routes it was proposed to abandon, no progress was made toward the carrying out of these proposals. If passengers can more efficiently be carried by motor buses upon certain existing trolley routes, such a solution may be accomplished by co-operation between the city authorities and the street surface companies in the substitution of new franchises for the old ones. A policy of trying to drive the trolley companies out of business by granting franchises to others to compete with them on the same or closely parallel routes would result in a great and needless economic waste. The entire motor bus situation in New York City has been given much publicity during the year 1924, and the report of the New York City Board of Transportation on October 20th of that year did much to clarify the situation. It seems to furnish a basis upon which a satisfactory solution might be obtained. The relative carrying facilities of trolleys and motor buses has little influence upon the planning of a regional system of highways, but comes rather under the transit problem. VI. PERIODICAL VARIATION OF TRAFFIC The various traffic counts available for different parts of the area have been made at different seasons of the year, days of the week, and hours of the day. If one attempts to apply any of these counts to the solution of a definite problem, a serious error may result if due allowance is not made for the variation in traffic at different times. Statistics and diagrams have been made in several places showing the seasonal variation, but a study of such records indicates very different results for different classes of roads. In discussing The Nature of the Problem, on page 37, the highways in the New York region were divided into three general classifications, and it appears that the periodical variation for any one of these groups is quite different from that for the others. -o--ay A series of diagrams has been zoo 0..-/+prepared not only to assist in the - - proper use of traffic statistics and i,-._ to show the minimum and maxi-, - 1,140 mum loads which a highway may - be called upon to carry, but also to indicate the possibility of increas-,~ ing total capacity by a more even 8oo LE 0 600 0 400 1600 400 200 NINTH AVE. 1000 T800 400 TN 200 TENTh AVE. 400 - 200 ELEVENTH AVE. C3 %A n 0) a C6 ~ Cl U) 'IV- U v\ u I~ I \ cI I CU Co 4 h '0 oHo u rs iay 1924 FiG. 40 75 TRUCK TRAFFIC AT TYPICAL POINTS I -180 160 IA ( I A I~ I I I "1120 Daily verae (Truck Traffic \ 100 60 ------ New Brunswick,N.J.(Albany St. Bridge) Oct. 19Z3 ---x--- Boston Post Road(N.Y-Conn. State Line) Oct.3,I921 4 140 -- --- Boston Post Road (Conn.-Mass. State Line) August 16,1921 Fourth Ave. Manhattan, N.Y.City 10:30 -11:30 A.M. June 2,-14,1924 20 ---- Heavy Trucking-New Brunswick,N.J. (Albany St.Bridge) Oct.l923 -0 4. U 4 -0 7 -0 u 0) U 5. 7, 0 4 -0 c 5.) I Mon. Tues. Wed. Thurs. Fri. Sat. Sun. Mon. U (4 -0 a, Qr (4 -0 4 -cI a) U 0o CLASSIFIED VEHICULAR TRAFFIC BASED UPON COUNTS ON 160 FOURTH AVE., MANHATTAN, NEW YORK CITY FROM 10:30 To 11:30A.M. JUNE 8,-14,1924 140 120 Total Trc - - -0 - -- -Daily Average (Total Traffic) 100 l 80 60--asseM ger J 60 40- 1\r f Motor Truck Traffic Horse Traffic Man. Tues. Wed. Thurs. Fri. Sat. Sun. Man. FIG. 41 DAILY VARIATION OF TRAFFIC 76 PERIODICAL VARIATION OF TRAFFIC 77 clearly the contrast between a street within the central business area, as shown by Fourth Avenue, Manhattan, and a street which also functions as a main arterial route for pleasure traffic. Fourth Avenue shows a traffic above the average on all the week days, reaching a maximum of 117 per cent on Saturday, while on Sunday the traffic is only about 57 per cent of the average day. On the other roads the reverse is true. Sunday carries by far the heaviest traffic, reaching a maximum of 172 per cent of the daily average. The curves at the bottom of this dia total traffic and also for the passenger car, omnibus, motor truck and horse-drawn traffic, each of these being shown as a function of the daily average total traffic. Omnibuses in both this and the fourth diagram include both taxicabs and motor buses. It appears that even on a business street in the heart of the wholesale district of Manhattan the motor truck traffic is only about one-sixth of the passenger car traffic and about one-third of the omnibus traffic. The fourth diagram, D, shows a similar analysis of the crosstown traffic on East 22d Street, SEASONAL VARIATION OF TRAFFIC 240 APRIL 4 __14 --- Conn. Highway between New 2z Haven and Aew London /920. - " --- Per/h Amboy-7otfenvi//e Ferry / \ Zo 1/.. __ -*- Boltimore-Woash.n7ton Highway / 1917-1920. / --o-- A// Ferries from the Boro. of Manhaffan, N.lCity /93. / SAverage Wee ---- 0I I I- - -- - - ^:=^=^=^=Al just west of Fourth Avenue, and illustrates clearly the difference between crosstown and north and south traffic in this part of Manhattan. The total traffic curve is quite similar in shape to that in Diagram C, but shows a greater variation during the different days of the week. Whereas the north and south traffic consisted mainly of passenger car traffic, the crosstown traffic is principally motor truck traffic, this varying on weekdays from 42 per cent to 57 per cent of the daily average and being equal to about twice the passenger car traffic and three times the omnibus traffic. It also appears that there is a much larger percentage of horse-drawn traffic on these east and west streets. and XIII give a summary of the jan. rea March Apri/ l aoy June July A ug. Sept OCt T/l'e of Year ea.. Jan. FIG. 42 gram show the amount of trucking as a function of the daily average of total traffic. Diagram B is based on the same statistics and shows the daily variation of motor truck traffic at the same points as a function of the average daily motor truck traffic. All the curves have the same general shape and Sunday shows only 10 to 25 per cent of the average daily traffic. Throughout the week days the traffic is more uniform on such a busy street as Fourth Avenue, Manhattan, while those streets further out from the central congested area show a heavier traffic on Friday than on the other days of the week. The third diagram, C, shows in more detail the result of the traffic counts made on Fourth Avenue, Manhattan. Curves are given for the Tables XII traffic counts on which the diagrams are based. 3. Seasonal Variation The seasonal variation of traffic by months of the year at four typical points is shown in Fig. 42. The counts made in 1920 by the State of Connecticut indicated very great variation throughout the year. During the month of August the weekly traffic reached a maximum of 225 per cent of the average week throughout the year; the minimum occurred in February and was only 20 per cent of the average week. Counts made on the Perth Amboy-Tottenville Ferry indicated maximum and minimum values in these same months but reached only 185 per cent of the 78 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS TABLE XII.-SUMMARY OF FOURTH AVENUE TRAFFIC COUNTS, JUNE 2-8, 1924 Counts were taken at Fourth Avenue, corner 22d Street, Manhattan, New York City Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday,a Saturday, Sunday, June 2 June 3 June 4 June 5 June 6 June 7 June 8 Time....................10.35-11.35 10.35-11.35 10.35-11.35 10.50-11.50 10.35-11.35 10.35-11.35 10.35-11.35 a.mrn. a. m. a. m. a. m. a. m. a.mrn. a.nm. Direction of traffic......... N. S. N. S. N. S. N. S. N. S. N. S. N. S. Motor vehicles............`752 845 793 819 766 890 832 853 834 836 717 914 522 374 Horse-drawn vehicles 20 31 28 31 15 33 17 25 15 24 16 37 3 2 Trolleys.................. 28 25 23 28 22 29 31 33 29 26 23 20 14 12 Total vehicular traffic.... 772 876 821 850 781 923 849 878 849 860 733 951 525 376 Total vehicular traffic.... 1,648 1,671 1,704 1,727 1,709 1,684b 901 Running time of through traffic in seconds......... 2,620 2,445 2,728 2,375 2,530 2,110 3,600 Number of times through traffic was stopped...... 28 34 32 43 42 24 0 Average time of halt in seconds................ 35 34 29 29 26 62 0 Number of vehicles crossing Fourth Avenue........ 218 234 256 246 484b 36 a Rain from 11 o'clock. Fifth Avenue traffic was diverted to parallel avenues at 11 o'clock. TABLE XIII.-SUMMARY OF FOURTH AVENUE TRAFFIC COUNTS, JUNE 8-14, 1924 Counts were taken at Fourth Avenue, corner 22d Street, Manhattan, New York City Analysis of Fourth Avenue Traffic Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday, June 8 June 9 June 10 June 11 June 12a June 13 June 14 Time....................10.35-11.35 10.35-11.35 11.00-12.00 10.35-11.35 10.45-11.45 10.45-11.45 10.35-11.35 a. m. a. m. a. m. a. m. a. m. a. m. a. m. Passenger vehicles..........882 913 955 1,010 823 987 1,085 Omnibuses............... 421 480 503 669 574 556 Trucks................... 14 182 160 178 164 164 164 Total motor vehicles.... 896 1,516 1,595 1,691 1,656 1,725 1,805 Analysis of 22d Street Traffic Passenger................ 32 76 70 65 47 54 64 Omnibus................. 0 37 32 28 22 35 Truck.................... 3 93 99 87 88 107 112 Horse drawn.............. 1 45 35 48 33 40 40 Total................... 36 214 241 232 196 223 251 Time of halt of Fourth Ave-, nue traffic in seconds... 0 900 955 800 1,030 860 1,185 Number of crossings.... 30 36 39 36 39 34 35 a Rain. PERIODICAL VARIATION OF TRAFFIC 79 average week as a maximum and 34 per cent as a minimum. It is probable that the Connecticut figures represent conditions on the relatively unobstructed through highways in the outer parts of the area, while the Perth Amboy-Tottenville figures represent conditions on the exits and entrances to the central area. In the congested part of the area there is very much less variation, as is shown by counts on the ferries connecting with Manhattan Island. In this case the maximum occurred in July but was only about 123 per cent of the average week, and the minimum occurred in February and was about 74 per cent of the average. The Christmas season seems to cause an upward jump in three of these curves for the month of December. VII. THEORETICAL STREET CAPACITY Formulas have been developed by different persons for the vehicular capacity of a street. It is well known that the recent increases of traffic have greatly reduced the average speed which vehicles can maintain in passing through urban districts. A study has been made to determine the various factors affecting street capacity and their influence on various types of streets. In this discussion the following symbols are used. r = Rate of deceleration in feet per second per second. tr = Total time in seconds between stops. th = Time of halt in seconds to permit movement on the cross streets. In a street where there can be uninterrupted traffic, the capacity depends only upon the running speed of a car and the distance maintained between cars. It is comparatively simple to ob 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 2 Velocity in M.PH (0 Velocity in M.P.H (V) FIG. 43 FIG. 44 C = Number of vehicles per lane per hour. d = Distance in feet traveled between stops. d,= Distance required for a motor vehicle to stop. p = Distance in feet, center to center of moving vehicles. v = Running velocity of motor vehicles in feet per second. V = Running velocity of motor vehicles in miles per hour. T = Time in seconds intervening between the application of brakes of two consecutive vehicles. L = Length of vehicle in feet. tain the average speed in such a case, but it is much more difficult to arrive at a value of the distance, center to center of cars, or p, which exists either in actual practice or can be assumed as a basis for estimating ultimate capacity. As the first part of this study, considerable attention has been given to a determination of the value of p. Fig. 43 gives the distance required for a vehicle to stop when moving at a certain velocity. Curve A is based upon a uniform rate of deceleration of 8 feet per second per second and requires a rela80 THEORETICAL STREET CAPACITY 8 81 tively large stopping distance. Curve B is based on Thermoid brake-lining tests with twowheel brak~es and curve C on similar tests made with four-wheel brakes, the latter showing stopping distances approximately one-half of those indicated by Curve A. It must be remembered that these last two curves are based on brakes which are supposed to be in good order and that they, therefore, show better results than might be expected in practice with similar types of brakes. The stopping distance has frequently been used as the running distance maintained between vehicles, but this is believed to be too approximate a method. The average distance center to center of moving vehicles, or value of p, maintained on any given street is determined by many factors. Among these are the mechanical efficiency of the motor vehicle and its brakes, which will affect the distance in which the driver may expect to stop his car, and the personal equation of the driver himself, some drivers keeping much closer than others to the car ahead. The interference from traffic crossing or turning into or f rom the street wifl cause the driver to maintain a larger distance between cars for his' own protection. When frequent stops are required to permit cross traffic to proceed, the average value of p and likewise the average velocity is greatly decreased. Wide undivided roadways with room for several lanes of vehicles but no provision to prevent the cars from shifting between different parts of the roadway are much less efficient per lane than narrow roadways where vehicles are required to keep within a definite lane. A mixed type of traffic, combined with a street where lanes are not well defined, causes a constant shifting from one side to the other, and large trucks or buses making frequent stops may actually take up more space than a single lane. With this condition the value of p is greatly increased. Observations have been made on unobstructed stretches of roadway showing the actual distance maintained at various velocities between two occurrences and they can be considered as representing a condition when a factor of safety due to defective brakes would be equal to zero. Other observations were made over stretches of roadway several hundred feet in length where motor vehicles were traveling in a well defined lane under conditions considered to represent the minimum spacing compatible with comfortable driving in congestion. The results of these gav,,e the upper curve in Fig. 44 which, therefore, indicates the minimum spacing which might be used at various velocities in determining the hourly capacities of city streets. One of the observations used in obtaining this upper curve is shown in Fig. 49 (page 86). The vertical distance between the upper and lower curves may be considered as the safety factor which must be added to the minimum individual spacings. A theoretical analysis of this diagram furnished a basis for computing capacities. Several forms of equations have been developed for expressing traffic capacities, and the most logical one seems to be that which expresses the running distance, center to center of cars in a single lane of traffic, as a function of L, V and T, already defined, and a safety factor due to the difference in values of d,, for various types of cars and brakes. As the stopping distance varies with the square of V, it is logical to assume that this safety factor is also a function of V2. The minimum observed spacings plotted against velocity gave a straight line relation (lower curve in Fig. 44), and the slope of this line corresponds to a value of T equal to 312 second. This value checks with the average value obtained in recent tests by the Bureau of Standards. The distance between the upper and lower curves was found to be equal to 0.072 V2. The general equation for A, or distance center to center of moving vehicles, can be stated as p=L+1.467 VT+0.072& V2........(2 The number of vehicles per lane per hour with uninterrupted traffic can then be expressed by the following equation: /I520V5280 V Diagram Showing HOURLY CAPACITY OF A LANE OF TRAFFIC Developed from the Formula 5280 V L +- 0.733 V + 0.072 V Where C = Capacity of a lane of traffic in cars per hour. L = Length of vehicle in feet. V = Velocity of vehicles in miles per hour. Problem: Oiven velocity in miles per hour V, average length of motor vehicles in feet L, to find capacity C. Enter diagram with the velocity V, project vertically to length curve L thence horizontally to the capacity curve and vertically to the capacity scale. Example: Velocity =20 m.p.h. Length = 15 feet. Ans. Capacity =1820. Capacity - Motor Vehicles per Hour (C) 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 40 0 10 20 30 Velocity in Miles per Hour (V) FIG. 45 CAPACITY DIAGRAM FOR UNINTERRUPTED TRAFFIC 82 p- distance center to Center of carS in feet. 0 50 100 150 20025 00 518 Z500 0000 0 (0 150 Q '40 45D =ieo u nscns one hc is ons rjcg2 >00 00\ X FIG.44 3GCAPACITY DIAGRAM FORACITYRRFPA LATRAFFIC 84 25 z0 L-!~ =r HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS Velocity in Miles per Hour FIG. 47 Under actual conditions traffic is generally interrupted at various street intersections and the street capacity is thereby very greatly reduced. A second theorem for capacity was developed for conditions such as exist with the tower system of traffic control used on Fifth Avenue in Manhattan. In traveling between any two successive points where traffic is stopped to permit cross traffic to proceed, a motor vehicle passes through three periods: first, a period of accelerated motion; second, a period of uniform motion; and third, a period of decelerated motion. The total number of vehicles per lane per hour is given by the equation: C = 3600d(4) (t, + th) P Actual observations made on Fifth Avenue, Manhattan, indicate that under such conditions of traffic the average rate of acceleration can be assumed as 6 feet per second per second; the corresponding average rate of deceleration can safely be assumed as 8 feet per second per second. This results in the following value of d. d = vt, v............. (5) Taking the same value for p as is given in equation (2), assuming 15 feet as the length of THEORETICAL STREET CAPACITY 85 -) L U 80 80 76 / Diaqram S5howing 76 / CAR MILE CAPACITY 72ofa 72 of o 66 - / SINGLE LANE OF TRAFFIC 68 AT VARIOUS SPEEDS 64- / -- -Oct.194 64 60 - I 0 - 0 5 0 5 - 60 / I 5-6 - --6 - - - 4--0------- - -48 Z4,--- Zi4 C0 --40 36------------------------------- - - - - -36 / 16I* - O o~ 10 0 5 10 15 20. 25-30- -5 4-0 Average Velocity in Miles per Hour FIG. 48 the average vehicle and reducing V to feet per second, there results p = 15 + v/2 - 0.0355v2........... (6) Based on these last three equations the capacity curves in Fig. 46 have been drawn. From these the capacity of a lane of traffic can be obtained at different running velocities and for various combinations of times of run and times of halt, such as are used in the block system of control. This represents conditions on a normal city street free from obstructions within the roadway. If there are trolley tracks or other such obstructions, the capacity would be reduced in accordance with the ratios between the capacity of 750 vehicles per lane per hour on Fifth Avenue, and that given for other conditions in Table XVI on page 111. On Fifth Avenue, Manhattan, the conditions in rush hours are as follows: 90 seconds-yellow light; motion on avenue. 60 seconds-green light; motion on cross streets. 10 seconds-two five-second intervals of red lights; notices of change. 160 seconds-complete cycle. This would mean for vehicles on the avenue a total running time, or tr, of 90 seconds, and time of halt, or th, of 70 seconds. Using Fig. 46 and HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS assuming a running speed of 20 miles per hour, there is a resultant capacity of 975 vehicles per lane per hour. This is the maximum for a single lane of traffic. Due to the interference of motor buses and the fact that at peak loads traffic on this avenue is heavier in one direction, it is never possible to use every moving lane to full capacity and the result is that the effective capacity on all lanes is only about 750 vehicles per lane per hour, or a little more than threequarters of the theoretical total. In order to obtain a basis for designing future streets and checking existing capacities the traffic discharge diagram in Fig. 45 has been prepared. This shows curves for uninterrupted traffic and for a stop and go system such as is obtained under tower traffic regulation. The former indicates a maximum lane capacity of 1,880 vehicles per hour with a velocity of about 15 miles per hour, and the latter a maximum of 1,020 vehicles per lane per hour with a running velocity of about 14 miles per hour, which corresponds to an average velocity, including traffic stops, of about 11 miles per hour. These represent single lane capacities under the most favorable conditions which it might be expected to obtain within the next 30 or 40 years. This will probably mean the much more intensive use of four-wheel brakes, the actual subdivision of the road surface into sections designed for only two lanes of moving motor vehicles, and marking the surface of the roadway of this section so as to divide it into two distinct lanes. Uninterrupted traffic would mean a roadway free from grade crossings unless at intervals two or more miles apart. The running velocity in this diagram means the average running speed maintained by vehicles when the signal permits movement on the street in question. The average speed maintained over a long distance, taking into consideration the times of halt, is naturally very much less. Observation would indicate that this sometimes becomes as lowx as fi-\ve or six miles per hour. It is obvious that in those parts of the area where uninterrupted trafic could be obtained it is possible to greatly increase the number of vehicles which may be moved over a street of the same width. All of these curves sl-ow very clearly that the number of vehicles increases quite rapidly as the running velocities approach values from 10 to 20 miles per hour. As speeds above this are permitted, the saving in time which results is obtained only by a considerable loss in the number of vehicles passing any fixed point. The true measure of capacity is a function of both number of vehicles and speed and to indicate the effect of velocity on such capacity Fig. 48 FIG. 49 ONE OF THE OBSERVATIONS USED IN DETERMINING MOTOR VEHICLE SPACINGS Velocity, 12.2 miles per hour., Average center to center spacing, 35 feet. (See Fig. 44, page 80) has been prepared to show car mile capacity of a single lane of traffic corresponding with the two traffic conditions shown in Fig. 47. In figuring the curve for tower traffic regulation, the average velocity was used instead of the running speed. It is seen that car mile capacity increases steadily with the velocity, reaching a total at 40 miles per hour of 53,000 car miles with uninterrupted traffic and 19,800 car miles with tower traffic regulation. VIII. LENGTH OF HAUL A knowledge of the length of haul of the various types of vehicular traffic is necessary to predict with any degree of certainty the future distribution of traffic. It is difficult to obtain accurate data for the construction of a length of haul curve because the class and origin of traffic lar curves may be interpreted by saying that the number of trips going at least any specified distance will be equal to that percentage of the total number of trips indicated by the intersection of the curve and the vertical line representing the distance. For example, of a typical group of 4 Length of Haul in Miles FIG. 50 vary considerably. In order to determine the length of haul for each class of traffic individual counts are necessary. A count was made of all the taxicabs leaving three typical New York City terminals and the result is shown in Fig. 50. The full line represents the average length of haul curve based on all the taxicab trips originating from the three terminals and may be considered a typical curve for Manhattan taxicabs. The average haul was found to be 1.525 miles. These and the following simi Manhattan taxicab trips only 15 per cent would probably go at least 2.5 miles. Similar counts were made by the Port of New York Authority of trucks hauling to or from various Manhattan railroad terminals. The results of these counts were used as the basis for the construction of the 1918 curves in Fig. 51. The average length of haul for all the trucks counted was found to be 1.36 miles, while for selected stations the average was 0.94 mile. Similar data obtained for the same selected sta 87 88 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS tions in January, 1913, which was before the intensive development of motor trucks, gave an average length of haul of 0.70 mile. The length of haul diagrams shown in Figs. 52 and 53 are based upon 24-hour origin and destination counts made by the Port of New York Authority during the summer of 1924 on the Perth Amboy-Tottenville ferry. Sample counts for a Sunday and a typical weekday have traffic from similar points of origin. For distances greater than 63 miles the inverse is true. A further analysis was made to reduce the counts to a common origin basis. The points of origin and destination were grouped into 27 districts. All parts of each district were about the same distance from the ferry and all communities contained therein had the same general characteristics. It was noted that if only that traffic 0. cl L c0 F 0 4 -'C 0u 0 L. a, -1I----------------------------------DIqo~hw \ Diagram Showing LENGTH OF HAUL OF TRUCK5 90 - -- - - ----------- To and from Railroad Freight Stations Borough of Monhattan, New York City Jan. 19Z5 80 Based on records of 8934 trips during the fall of 1918 and 2,430 trips on Jan. 16,1913. 70 ---\------- ----------- All Stations 1916 - \. _ Stations at St. John's Park and Piers No. 16,25 and 31 Jan. 16, 1915----- Fall of 1918 - Averoge Houls 50 1- ------- a70 Mi.-_ 1.36 Mi.40 -0.94 M.-- -- 30--^---A---- --------------------------------------,o0-- --,---^--^--------------------------- 300 20 -0 2 3 4 5 6 7 Lenqth of Haul in Miles FIG. 51 been analyzed to determine the variation of Sunday and weekday traffic. Fig. 52 indicates that the length of haul of all vehicles counted on Sunday was 55.2 miles, while the length of haul of the weekday traffic was 56 miles. The weekday traffic is seen to vary more uniformly than the Sunday traffic. For distances less than 63 miles the Sunday traffic, expressed in percentage of total trips from various points of origin, travels a greater distance than the corresponding percentage of weekday was considered which originated from or was destined to the district adjacent to the ferry, a curve was obtained quite different from that based on all traffic crossing the ferry. This was caused by the fact that the short-haul traffic of districts not adjacent to the ferry did not appear in the total count. Length of haul curves for each district were drawn and found to have the same characteristics for distances greater than that from the points of origin to the point of count, that is, the point at which traffic begins to aa 5, 4-~ aU Length of Haul in Miles FIG. 52 U,) 0a '5 F0 5) '5 a 5) 5-. 30 10 90 70 i I _ 56 ____ - _ Curves used in derivinq formulae for lenqth of haul based an traffic records used in above diagram. 40 I 30 zo14 10 01-~c AN-Ao -AJ elan' m Curves used in deriving formulae for length of haul based an trarffic; N records used in above diogrorn. 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 100 10 9 7 6 5 4 k 2 3 4- 5 6 78691 0 20 50 Length of Haul in Mil FIG. 53 89 3 4 50 60 73 00SO100 0 -00 300 400 90 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS distribute. Redrawing these curves with this point as a common origin, a combined length of haul curve for all vehicles originating within any one district was obtained. This analysis closely checked the length of haul curve developed for the districts adjacent to the ferry, and the result of the analysis gave the two lower curves in Fig. 52. The curves were replotted to a logarithmic scale in Fig. 53 and are seen to approach the shape of hyperbolas. The straight lines indicate the axes of symmetry or directrixes of the curves. Lengths of haul data for taxis and trucks were analyzed and gave curves of the same general shape as those indicated in Fig. 53. The slopes of the directrixes were also found to be approximately the same. This indicates that a length of haul law for all classes of traffic may be expressed by one general equation with various constants for different classes of traffic. To obtain the simplest equation it is necessary to rotate and translate the axis so that the intersection of the directrix and the 100 per cent ordinate on Fig. 53 is the origin, and then if the directrix as drawn represents positive values of X, the approximate equation of the general curve may be expressed as given in equation (7) below, where, m = tan 0 = the slope of the directrix; a = constant measured along the X axis; b = constant measured along the Y axis; c = constant measured along the directrix from the origin to the point of maximum deviation of the curve from a true hyperbola; and d = the maximum deviation of the actual curve from a true hyperbola, measured parallel to the Y axis. The constants a, b, c and d were determined from a natural scale corresponding to the logarithmic scale of Fig. 53. Rotating and translating the origin to the origin of Fig. 53 equation (7) becomes equation (8), where, Xo= the length of haul in miles; Yo= percentage of total trips; H = Xo ordinate of the previous origin; and K = Yo ordinate of the previous origin. With the new system of co-ordinates the equation of the directrix becomes: Log Yo = m log Xo + log N, or........(9)Yo = N (Xom).......................(9a) where N is the intercept on the Yo axis when Xo = 1. The length of haul for the New York City taxicab and truck counts is so much smaller that curves for these were not indicated on Fig. 53. Equation constants for all classes of traffic are tabulated in Table XIV. Log Y= log(Xm) - b2 - log2 Xd/(c-a)-d 2- - c.........................7) X Fsi - _ d SKsinH cd nHCSK HoosO c-a Log cos log y(ino Xos) -b2 + d c- g2a y X os.(8) K -. _ LENGTH OF HAUL 91 TABLE XIV.-CONSTANTS FOR LENGTH OF HAUL EQUATIONS FOR VARIOUS TYPES OF TRAFFIC For all traffic passing a For all traffic originating Manhattan fixed point within a district trucking Constant Manhattan to and from Sunday, Weekday, taxicabs railroad based on based on Sunday Weekday freight sta1,338 trips 554 trips tions a.183.391.217.350.13.207 b.250.468.266.398.191.293 c.600..850.620.700 1.00.300 d.0025.106.050.088.060.090 m = tan 0 1.368 1.205 1.213 1.13 1.47 1.42 N.468.500 1.69 1.44 80.0 82.2 H 51.1 84.0 29.6 43.4 1.17 1.15 K 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 IX. METHODS OF RELIEVING TRAFFIC CONGESTION Whatever may be done by means of regulations to improve traffic conditions, it must always be remembered that restrictions which interfere with liberty to do what would be reasonable under normal conditions, and become more than a restraint on impropriety and wrongdoing, may be injurious to business and nothing more than a palliative. Wherever possible a system of regulation should be ancillary to city planning and not a substitute for it. But as there has been failure to direct physical growth under a comprehensive plan it is necessary to impose an excessive degree of restrictive regulation, and this is one reason why considerable attention has to be devoted to it in this report. The urgency of the street traffic problem should not blind the traffic authorities to the detrimental effects of some regulations on business and property adjacent to the streets that are regulated. This is bound to be the effect, to a certain degree, of all restrictions and, therefore, physical improvements that provide more space are more generally beneficial than restrictive regulations imposed to overcome lack of space. 1. By Regulation Regulation of Trafic Movement.-Several varieties of regulation have been enforced in different parts of the region. Certain streets have been set aside for one direction traffic. On some thoroughfares traffic has been restricted solely to pleasure vehicles, while from others such vehicles have been prohibited so that the street is set aside for business vehicles. Parking time has been limited to varying periods on different streets, depending on conditions, the shortest periods meaning that vehicles are permitted only to stop to discharge or take on passengers. Traffic regulations have several ideals underlying them. Originally they were enforced to prevent accidents and thus they naturally fell within the purview of the Police Department. It was soon noticed that traffic regulation for this primary purpose was beneficial from an economic standpoint and the reduction of congeston n and the expedition of all travel have come to be accepted objectives. The fundamental principle is the desire to secure the maximum use of present facilities. A further step might be some form of legislation which would reduce the volume of unnecessary traffic so as to afford better facilities for that which is essential to community needs. The exclusion of pleasure vehicles from certain motor truck thoroughfares is explicitly in this direction. Great progress has been made during the last few years in the regulation of traffic in the congested areas, and many people believe that this has been carried, if not to the physical limit, at least to the limit which is desirable. The block system installed on Fifth Avenue, Park Avenue and parts of Broadway, Manhattan, has greatly increased the capacity of those streets and has probably resulted in drawing to them a large amount of through traffic which could be better cared for on other streets. In order to spread this traffic more evenly over the island not only would it be necessary to resurface many of the avenues to make them more attractive for automobile traffic but additional regulation would be necessary to deflect traffic to them. The means for regulating traffic in the less congested parts of the area have not been so well developed and there is undoubtedly considerable opportunity for improvement. This would consist not only in small physical changes to direct the lines of traffic at important intersections and the installation of automatic signals, but in some case the actual re-routing of vehicles. During the past year or two there has been a great increase in the use of the block system of traffic control, and in some cases the installation has simply been copied from that already in use, without due regard to the special conditions in the locality. In places where there is relatively little cross traffic, such an arbitrary use of this system would probably result in a considerable increase in the time required to travel along the thoroughfare on which the signals were installed. This would result from the fact that vehicles might often be held up by the stop signal for a length of time out of all proportion to the length 92 METHODS OF RELIEVING TRAFFIC CONGESTION 93 of time required for the cross traffic. This system is most efficient in both directions where there is considerable cross traffic at all the intersections, so that the time of halt on the main avenue is utilized by a large number of vehicles on the cross streets. Such conditions exist on the Island of Manhattan and on many other main avenues within the congested district. It is obvious that if a system of such signals could be installed to operate progressively as one moves along such an avenue, it might be possible to permit vehicles traveling at a velocity which corresponds with the time between the -change of any two successive signals to proceed without interruption the full length of the avenue under regulation. The result would be a great saving proximately another seven blocks across which the crosstown traffic could move. With a system of one-way traffic on these cross streets, it would be possible for vehicles desiring to turn into the avenue to do so and stop in front of the next cross street during the period that the avenue is open to cross traffic. Such a type of regulation was proposed by E. P. Goodrich several years ago as a "platoon system." The specific application shown in the diagram is similar to a proposal recently advanced by Schuyler Schieffelin. Such a system would concentrate the moving traffic upon the avenue within that approximately 50 per cent of its length which would be occupied by the moving groups of traffic. Within this space vehicles would move SUGGESTED METHOD OF REGULATION ON A PRINCIPAL AVENUE RESTRICTED TO ONE WAY TRAFFIC BASED UPON TRAFFIC MOVING UNINTERRUPTEDLY AT 20 MILES PER HOUR W=White Light R= Red Light G = Green Light -------------------------lmin.3sec.------------------------ 1EO,-|0 ' JUUJJJUUUUI ~UTUL JUU I L R w- w --- W --- w R G 6 G 6 G G R'Wave" of Traffic moving along Avenue Crosstown Traffic and Avenue filling up Every 9 Seconds Each Letter Moves One Block to the Left Nov. 1924 FIG. 54 in time for the longitudinal traffic and a resulting increase in capacity. Such an arrangement could readily be installed on a one-way street, and it would be theoretically possible to adapt it to a two-way street and so time the traffic in each direction as to permit cross traffic to pass through the gaps between the successive waves of traffic. Fig. 54 indicates such a system of traffic control as it would operate if applied to a street similar to Fifth Avenue, Manhattan, if it were limited to one-way traffic. In this case a nine second interval between changes of the signals at successive cross streets would permit a velocity of vehicles on the avenue of 20 miles per hour. There would result a "wave of traffic" approximately seven blocks in length, followed by a gap of ap without interruption. Under the tower system of traffic control practically the full length of the avenue is occupied by moving traffic while the signal for motion is displayed, but the motion is periodically stopped entirely. The big advantage in the platoon system would, therefore, be in the greatly increased average speed which would result and which it is estimated would give an increase in car-mile capacity of about 100 per cent. The number of vehicles passing any fixed point within an hour would not be materially increased. There are other types of regulation of traffic movement which might be called restrictive regulations, which would also alleviate congestion on the streets. One of these methods is by re 94 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS stricting the time for certain trucking operations, such as delivery of coal and the removal of ashes and other waste products. If it were made compulsory in certain business districts to carry on such operations during the night hours when the streets are free from congestion, it would not only reduce the amount of moving traffic during the congested hours but would make available space which is now taken up for considerable periods by such vehicles while they are loading or unloading. Considerable improvement might be obtained in the congested business districts by specifying definite trucking routes between certain parts of the city. If trucks were required to move along these routes their control at important intersections would be greatly simplified with a resulting saving in time and efficiency. Another method which is now being intensively studied by the Port of New York Authority is by the consolidation of trucking operations and shipping points so as to avoid a duplication of trips with partly loaded vehicles. This is very closely allied to the subject of store door delivery which has been actively discussed in connection with New York City for several years. The Merchants' Association of New York has been an active supporter of such a system of freight delivery and in their recommendations have stressed the point that it must be optional, the charges must be fair and borne by the shippers and receivers and the establishment should take place gradually. As this whole problem is covered in the report for the year 1924 of the Port of New York Authority, any detailed discussion of it in this report would seem a needless duplication. Parking Regulations.- Public highways were originally designed for the movement of vehicles and except in rare instances were toll roads in the outlying districts. City streets were designed and laid out to serve as rights-of-way to give access to property and for other purposes incidental to the use of land and buildings, as well as for traffic ways. The standing of conveyances upon the highways was often explicitly prohibited. In Elizabethan times, when hackney coaches were first introduced into London, an ordinance was passed requiring them to stand within enclosures on private property, much in the same way in which taxicab stands are often provided by the corporations which operate them. Fundamentally, it is probably illegal to occupy street space by parked vehicles even for loading and unloading purposes. It seems, however, an unnecessary hardship to preclude the parking of an owner's car in front of his premises on a little used residence street where no hardship would be involved upon neighbors or traveling public. It is obviously a public hardship, however, to permit the use of a great part of a street by standing vehicles which remain for. hours while the owner occupies himself in his office or in other ways, or for almost continuous loading and unloading of commercial vehicles during the busy hours of the day. With the great increase in the use of automobiles their parking has become an acute problem. At many points in almost every community, however large or small, present facilities are taxed to their full capacity and ordinances are being enacted, which become more and more stringent with each passage, restricting the parking time and in some cases prohibiting it entirely. Twenty-minute, thirty-minute and one-hour periods are common. During the latter part of 1924, twenty-minute parking limits were imposed upon a large number of streets in the borough of Manhattan. The relief to moving traffic was very noticeable, but it appeared that twenty minutes was, in many places, too short a time to permit the transaction of business, and consequently the time was tentatively extended to one hour. The adjustment of these regulations to take care of special conditions should be comparatively simple. Public opinion is of such present temper that it demands all the parking facilities which seem reasonable, and more. With these facts in mind, officials are creating parking spaces on open plazas, along the sides of less used streets, and on publicly owned properties. Pressure in some cases is so great that communities have purchased properties for this specific purpose. This practice is open to grave question as to the reasonableness of the use of public funds for this purpose. Where spaces already exist which are not otherwise used, it seems reasonable that they should be set aside for parking purposes. In Manhattan it might be METHODS OF RELIEVING TRAFFIC CONGESTION 95 possible to set aside in this manner considerable areas along the waterfronts and to encourage vehicle owners to park at such points under protection of the police or of paid concessionaries. Owners could walk from such parking spaces to their offices, even though the distance might be several blocks in many instances. One effect of the recent parking restrictions has been to emphasize greatly the need for parking facilities accessible to the business district. Private enterprise is also endeavoring to cope with the situation by providing terminal garages. The well-known Spiral Ramp Garage which has been erected in Boston is an excellent example of one method of solving the problem. Wherever possible, taxicab corporations should be required to provide their own stands on private property, and pressure should be brought to bear on all concerns which operate a large number of vehicles which load at central points, to provide loading space wholly within property lines. The passenger unloading spaces at the Pennsylvania and Grand Central terminals are of this type, as are also the spaces provided by several department stores for loading their delivery wagons off the public streets. A New York City department store is providing garage facilities for its patrons. Cars are driven from the store to the garage and returned, when wanted, by competent drivers. Five minutes is the maximum time required to drive a car from garage to store. Those establishments which handle a large amount of trucking in the congested business districts are the most serious offenders in regard to the use of the streets for private purposes. There are several cases in both Manhattan and Brooklyn where the owners have voluntarily installed loading and unloading spaces within their building lines. The result is not only the removal of a large amount of standing traffic from the streets, but a considerable increased efficiency in the handling of merchandise. Not only is interference from sidewalk traffic avoided, but its handling after it leaves the truck is greatly facilitated. Figs. 26 and 27 (facing page 59) illustrate both what has been done along these lines and the highly undesirable conditions that exist where unloading and storage take place directly upon the sidewalks. It is quite probable that a campaign could persuade many such offenders that it is beneficial to them to provide more suitable facilities. If relief cannot be obtained in this way, some restrictive ordinances will become necessary. The increasing stringency exercised with reference to parking time suggests ultimate conditions when no parking, loading or unloading would be permitted on any north and south main thoroughfare on Manhattan Island, and in similar main streets in other parts of the region. Were no parking, loading or unloading to be permitted on any north and south avenue in Manhattan, the resulting capacity for traffic south of Central Park would be increased to 150 per cent of the 1923 capacity, and were certain changes also to be made in the carrying capacity of some of the avenues by the removal of certain elevated railways and trolley tracks, it would make possible the doubling of the 1923 capacity. Segregation of Traffic.-One of the simplest methods of providing increased traffic capacity is by the segregation of various types of traffic so as to permit freer movement along the individual routes. Two methods of carrying this out are usually considered-first, the segregation of through and local traffic; second, the segregation of trucks and passenger vehicles. If it could be carried out effectively the first method would not only be of great benefit to the central congested district but to all the main highways passing through outlying populous centers. Except in regard to the prevention of trucking on certain routes, it is difficult and probably not feasible, as a rule, to segregate traffic by any direct regulation. It could be promoted indirectly to an effective degree by the planning of the highway system. For instance, the creation of by-pass routes with limited or no parking facilities around congested centers would draw through traffic and offer no attractions for that which desired to make local stops. In this, as in so many other matters, physical planning in combination with regulation can accomplish better results than regulation alone. There is, unfortunately, a feeling among some merchants that congestion of traffic on the streets on which they front is an asset to their business. 96 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS It is believed and hoped that any such assumption is rapidly being proved as false and that merchants are awakening to the fact that the av"erage motorist prefers to do business at points which he can reach without getting into traffic jams which will cause great inconvenience, delay and possible accident. There are many typical instances in the area where through, traffic on a business street greatly interferes with the facilities for doing business. In Manhattan, Fifth and Fourth Avenues are the most notable examples, while in the populous centers outside of New York City the Albany Post Road in Yonkers, the Lincoln Highway in Elizabeth, the Jericho Turnpike and Merrick Road on Long Island and the Paterson Plank Road in Paterson are fair examples of such congestion. Careful study should be made of the opportunities presented by the segregation of through and local traffic upon parallel streets not only in New York City but in the other communities, the through traffic being kept away from the local business streets as much as possible. The segregation of trucks and passenger vehicles has in the past generally been made by the restriction of certain parkways and boulevards to passenger vehicles only. It is probable that in addition to such restrictions there will eventually have to be highways which are intended for trucks only, and which passenger vehicles would either naturally avoid or from which they would be excluded. The Port of New York Authority, in its Report of 1921, indicated a skeleton system for motor truck highways, using mostly parts of the existing highway system. In the densely congested part of the area, particularly on Manhattan Island, where, as has been pointed out, some additional street facilities will soon have to be provided, it may be advisable to raise some of these new facilities above the existing street levels. In this case it is believed that the motor trucks could best be left upon the present street level, as they are slower moving vehicles and consist much more largely of local traffic. It would be comparatively simple to provide some form of elevated light traffic roadways on or adjacent to the Hudson and East River waterfronts of Manhattan Island. If connections were provided only~at points about one mile or more apart, such routes would naturally be used mainly by through traffic. On such a structure vehicles might be permitted a maximum speed of twenty-five to thirty miles an hour. A decreased velocity would accommodate more vehicles per hour, as shown by the curves in Fig. 47 (page 84), but at the sacrifice of the considerable saving in time with higher speeds. In the outskirts of the city and in the more remote suburban areas, the motor truck routes are those that should be elevated and they would resemble a railroad right-of-way. Such routes might first be provided in the outlying districts by widening existing arterial streets and placing a motor truck roadway alongside the existing roadway, separated by a low curb. The truck roadway could be carried over the principal cross traffic routes on a temporary structure, and eventually there might be a raised motor truck roadway in the center of the widened thoroughfare throughout its whole length. A new type of segregation which has been tried in a few instances is that by types of motive power. For instance, on one of the East River bridges no horse-drawn vehicles were permitted so as to provide possibilities for higher speed on the part of passenger vehicles. In that instance the horse-drawn vehicles were diverted to another bridge. It might be possible to enact ordinances for the promulgation of police regulations, in the case of thoroughfares used for trolleys and motor buses, whereby pleasure cars containing, as they do, only a few passengers, could be detoured to less frequented thoroughfares, even where such detouring involved a considerable extra mileage. Thus there would be provided additional facilities for the trolley cars and motor buses, each of which could carry from ten to twenty times as many passengers as could the pleasure automobile. In a somewhat similar manner itinerant vacant taxicabs might be prohibited from operating on*most of the north and south avenues in Manhattan, such cabs being assigned space on regular stands where they could be secured by prospective passengers, while they could also be permitted to operate empty on cross streets and the less frequented and more distant north and south thoroughfares. Such a prohibition of METHODS OF RELIEVING TRAFFIC CONGESTION 97 "cruising" taxicabs has been carried out during 1924 at certain points in Manhattan to the great advantage of other traffic. 2. By Zoning The volume of traffic on the streets is of course much affected by the bulk, as determined by the heights and densities, of the buildings fronting upon the streets and the use to which such buildings are put. There is a complexity of relationship between the extent and character of traffic and the bulk and use of buildings that is too frequently lost sight of in considering measures of relief for traffic congestion. The restriction of the heights, densities and uses of buildings, under what has come to be designated as zoning, is based on the police power of government and therefore has for its object the reasonable regulation of the uses of buildings and land so as to protect the health, safety and general welfare of the inhabitants of the community. To what extent this regulation can be imposed for the purpose of relieving congestion of traffic is open to question, but it seems likely that if the restrictions necessary to secure an adequate measure of health and safety were imposed an indirect result would be to remove the causes of much of the existing traffic congestion. Whatever doubt may be expressed as to the extent to which high buildings contribute to traffic difficulties, there can be no doubt that where great height is combined with a high density, or degree of occupancy, of the land and where in addition an intensive business use prevails, one of the effects is to overcrowd adjacent streets. Another effect is to make it difficult if not impossible to maintain adequate and comfortable means of transit to meet the needs of such a highly concentrated building development as is found in the central areas of New York. The New York Zoning Ordinance of 1916 probably contained as much restriction with reference to heights of buildings as would then meet with public approval. Very great benefits have accrued from this law in many directions but it is doubtful if it has afforded any relief for traffic conditions. The strengthening of the Zoning Ordinance to a degree that would materially relieve the congestion of traffic and means of transit would probably fail to receive any immediate large measure of support from public opinion. It is obvious, however, that a relationship exists between building heights and densities and street widths and that useful, if not precise, estimates can be made of the amount of traffic created by buildings of certain bulks and types of use. It is obvious, too, that the sidewalk can carry only a given number of pedestrians per unit of width per minute during congested periods, such as the evening rush hour. There is also a fairly definite relationship between the area of land and the tonnage of manufactured products that can be fabricated daily. Under present conditions, with the general opening and closing of offices at the same hours of the day and with trucks being loaded in order to catch certain departing freight trains, the density of street traffic at its maximum is also seen to bear a measurable relation to building bulk. The limitation of building heights under the present zoning law is a first approximation toward a limitation of building bulk to conform to the street capacity through a limitation of building height to from one to two and one-half times the width of the street. Such a method of regulation in proportion to street width thus seems to be logical even although it may not be feasible to impose it to such limits as is necessary to prevent traffic congestion. To ascertain the relief that can be obtained by zoning we are confronted with the problem of getting indirect benefits from regulations that are designed for other purposes, except to the extent that the courts are likely to regard convenience for traffic on roadways and sidewalks as an element in public welfare and safety in the streets in the same category as safety in buildings. Undoubtedly the question of safety in buildings is largely dependent on freedom of movement on the streets approaching the buildings for purposes of fire prevention, and to that extent it is a legitimate exercise of the police power to restrict heights and densities in the interest of freer movement of traffic. The relation between zoning, traffic and transit is so involved that it has been thought desirable to deal with this subject in more detail in a subse 98 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS quent report, when investigations now being made are completed. 3. By Physical Improvements By-passing of Congested Areas.-The need for by-passing the central congested area is clearly indicated in Fig. 6 (page 33), and is generally recognized by the different communities within the area. The New Jersey State Highway Commission has designed a special commercial traffic way primarily as an extension of the traffic tunnel now under construction, so laid down as to bypass the congested sections of Newark and Elizabeth and to pass through a cut so as to obviate grade crossings in Jersey City. Studies have been made for the connection of existing parts of improved roads in Queens and Nassau Counties to provide by-pass routes around such communities as Jamaica, Hempstead, etc. This same study has pointed out the importance of New Street (Linden Boulevard), authorized in 1924 in the borough of Brooklyn, and of Flatlands Avenue (a mapped street only parts of which have been acquired) as by-pass connections from the residential section of Brooklyn to the more easterly parts of Long Island. There are many other places in the area where similar studies should be made, and it is believed that by the most efficient use of existing improved roads satisfactory solutions can often be arrived at without expensive reconstruction. Examples of such routes will be described in a later report. In most cases the traffic on arterial routes is much heavier at maximum periods than that on the principal cross highways, and it becomes necessary for vehicles to stand in line for long periods of time while only a part of those waiting can be passed through the congested point during each halting of traffic on the cross highway. If this traffic at such points could be distributed over two or three parallel routes, it is obviqus that two or three times the amount of traffic could be passed across the intersecting highway in the same period of time. In several parts of the region it is possible to create new diagonals which will greatly increase facilities and space for traffic. An excellent example of such a diagonal is the extension of Central Avenue in Newark, from the Hudson and Manhattan Terminal to the vicinity of the Pennsylvania Station on Market Street. Several years ago a careful analysis was made of the benefits which would accrue, based upon savings in gasoline, tires and time of vehicles and increased valuations of adjacent property. It was then estimated that the benefits were so large that the cost of the improvement would be entirely returned within five years. Grade Separation.-Probably the most efficient but also a very expensive method of relieving traffic congestion is by a separation of the grades of intersecting streets. Such a procedure is almost prohibitive where the property fronting on streets is intensively developed with high-priced buildings. There are many places on the outskirts of *the congested district where such a method could be carried out at important intersections at a reasonable expense. Grade separation has been carried out in Manhattan in the viaducts around the Grand Central Station and has been often and seriously proposed for the intersection of Fifth Avenue and 42d Street. The estimates for future traffic indicate that this method may have to be employed to a considerable extent, and suggestions along this line will be given in a later report. Street Widenings.-One of the most common physical methods of providing increased street capacity is by some form of street widening. There are many places outside of the most congested area where this method can be advantageously applied to the main arterial highways. Provision has been made for this in certain parts of New York City, as, for example, the Merrick Road and Jackson Avenue (Northern Boulevard) in the borough of Queens, and Riverdale Avenue in the Bronx. For such improvements to be effective they must be carried out to as great a distance from the central area as is required to meet the needs of growing traffic, and not stop arbitrarily at municipal boundaries. At certain strategic points in the suburban area the cost of a widening improvement may be justified by increased advantages over a considerable area. When, however, such a project is considered in the center of business districts, its justification must depend mainly upon the extent of the decrease in congestion upon METHODS OF RELIEVING TRAFFIC CONGESTION 9 99 the street under consideration. The following method may be used in computing this: assuming that the cost of widening will be $1,000 per linear foot of roadway, it would then cost $600,000 to widen a block 600 feet in length. If such a block carried a maximum traffic of 2,600 vehicles per hour, and the period during which serious delays resulted was equivalent to two hours of such congestion, there would be 1,560,000 vehicles affected per year, assuming 300 days of congestion. Computing interest on $600,000 at 6 per cent, the annual saving would have to amount to $36,000, or 2.3 cents per vehicle per block. With a 600-foot block, and a cost of five cents per minute for operating a motor vehicle, this would be equivalent to a saving for each vehicle of 0.46 minute per block. If the average velocity during the hours of congestion is six miles per hour, 1. 14 minutes would be required to go one block. The expense of widening would therefore be justified if this time could be decreased by 0.46 minute, so that it would take only 0.68 minute to go one block, which is equivalent to an average velocity of 10 miles a n hour. In those parts of Manhattan Island where property has been most intensively developed, the cost of street widenings is so enormous that their financing may be impracticable even though it may be proved that it would be economically j ustified. The widening of roadways within existing street lines is not strictly "street widening,' although it is sometimes referred to as such. This type of treatment has been and is being carried out with very great effect in Manhattan Island, as by the addition of a *few feet of roadway it has been possible often to increase the street capacity by an additional moving lane of vehicles. A rcading. -Another method of increasing the space in existing streets is by the installation of sidewalk arcades, making all the present street width available for roadway surface. While there are many effective examples of such treatment in foreign cities it has not yet been developed to any extent in the United States, A physical -widening increases the width for both traffic and light and therefore confers the greatest benefit and may cost no more than arcading. The latter method is best adapted to relatively narrow streets where the present roadways permit only two or three moving lanes of vehicles and the cost of the improvements makes the ordinary widening prohibitive. The ready adaptability of the modern steel frame office and loft buildings to the introduction of arcades may often permit this method to be used with the least encroachment on taxable values. It should, however, be regarded as in the nature of a last resort to be employed only when it is impossible to widen the street. Its architectural advantage can only be obtained, as a rule, when it is introduced as part of the original design of a building and not as an afterthought. As employed in Vesey Street, Manhattan, it is an improvement and there are many cases where arcading through existing modern buildings could be linked up with physical widening of adjacent street frontages to great advantage. In those areas where the City of New York is considering arcading, the lower. floors of the buildings depend chiefly if not wholly on artificial lighting. It may be argued that this fact would indicate the need of some method of obtaining more natural light in the same operation that is employed to increase the street space. This would result from either widening the street or increasing the zoning restrictions so as to lessen the density and heights of buildings to be erected or reconstructed. Arcading should not be employed as an alternative to strengthening the zoning plan where the latter is practicable. In certain classes of business buildings arcaded space is greatly needed as a means of facilitating the movement of pedestrian traffic. The owners of property who object to arcading, or to providing loading space on the ground that it will depreciate the value of business properties should recognize that whatever, if any, depreciation occurs will be offset by the benefit that will accrue to their property by the freedom of movement 100 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS European cities because the climatic conditions have rendered it less necessary, it would undoubtedly confer certain advantages in the way of shelter from the sun in summer and during severe weather in winter. The objection that arcades lessen the opportunity for show window display can be easily overcome by designing them in such a manner as to increase rather than lessen the window space. This can be done by adopting a system already used by many retail stores in New York City and elsewhere in providing a walking space for the public over part of their property and behind showcases adjacent to the present sidewalk line. X. ESTIMATES OF FUTURE TRAFFIC There are three ways which have been considered for estimating the future amount of traffic on the principal highways. These are as follows: 1. By an estimated distribution method based on a routing of vehicular traffic from each county to every other county, the amount of traffic being a function of population and distance. 2. By establishing a relation between traffic and automobile registration and applying this to future registration estimates. 3. By establishing the relation between traffic and time and carrying this forward over a period of years. The last method is the most obvious one but allows no opportunity to consider future changed conditions and therefore proved unsatisfactory. The two other methods proved much more flexible in this respect and both have been used as a basis for estimates of amount of traffic in the year 1965. The first one is the most scientific method. First Method It is assumed that the traffic radiating from any one district to all other districts in the area, a county being the unit considered, is inversely proportional to the distance between the districts and directly proportional to the automobile ownership in the districts. The area under consideration is so large that any traffic destined outside of the area can be neglected. With an assumed traffic of one trip per vehicle per day at the time of maximum traffic, that is on a Sunday during the summer months, and using the route which would probably be taken in each case, the number of trips was determined along the principal highways by vehicles originating in each of the various counties and parts of counties in the region. The sum of all such figures gave a total 24-hour traffic. Using the curves in Fig. 39 (page 74) showing the hourly variation of traffic during a day, the maximum hourly traffic was computed as one and three-quarter times the average hourly traffic. Comparing these results with actual 1922 traffic counts as shown on the highway traffic map (Fig. 6, page 33) it appears that the actual number of trips per vehicle on the principal roads varied from about 0.3 to 1.1. By the year 1965 it is estimated that the saturation of traffic will decrease to a certain extent the use of the individual car and, therefore, only three-quarters of the total estimated 1965 registration of 6,720,000 was used. Using, for this part of the registration, the same number of trips per vehicle which was found upon each route under 1922 conditions, the same procedure gave estimated maximum hourly traffic on each one of these routes in the year 1965. The Second Method of estimating traffic was based on the relation between traffic and registration. Fig. 55 indicates a study of the statistics for roads in the central part of the area where the necessary traffic counts were available. The difficulty of using this method is the uncertainty as to what area to assume as furnishing the registration to be considered. In arriving at the upper curve for the East River bridges, an estimate was made of those percentages of the motor vehicle registration of the boroughs of Manhattan, Brooklyn and Queens, which directly influence the bridge traffic, and the traffic figures were plotted as a function of these registrations. Separate points were plotted for counts on the Manhattan, Williamsburg and Queensboro bridges and for the total of all three. It is seen that they all fall very close to the line indicated. For the other curves on this diagram New York City registration was used. All of these lines can be expressed by equations of the form T = kR".............. (10) where T equals Traffic, R equals Registration, k is a constant, and n is determined from the slope of the respective curves. It appears that the value of n is higher for streets within the central part of the district and decreases as one goes further out from the center of New York City. This may be expressed by saying that traffic varies as between the 0.37th power and the 0.98th power of the registration. In still other words, traffic has been almost directly proportional to 101 102 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS registration on main highways in the most congested districts, but on the highways in the less congested parts of the city it has lagged behind the registration, and on the Merrick Road at the 400 Diagram Showing 300 RELATION OF TRAFFIC TO REGISTRATION OF MOTOR VEHIGLE5 IN NEW YORK CITY Auqust 1924 mately the center of each county was plotted as a function of the county registration at the same date. 1922 figures were used as this was the latest date for which both traffic and registration (D C <0;3 H 0 9 -p Qc0 t-C O L 400 oo00 200 100 90 60 70 60 50 40 30 10 9 6 7 6 5 11 4 1000 50 60 70 60 90 100 200 Registration (R) in Thousands FIG. 55 city line has varied as about the cube root of the figures were available. It appears that these registration. results closely follow a straight line on logarithIn order to form a basis for determining future mic paper, which line is indicated in Fig. 56 and traffic on definite routes the 1922 maximum the equation of which would be hourly traffic over arterial highways at approxi- Traffic= (Registration)-........ (11) ESTIMATES OF FUTURE TRAFFIC 103 A similar process has been followed for the traffic crossing the boundaries of each county on the principal arterial routes, which has been called the circumferential traffic. It is indicated that the sum of the maximum hourly traffic on all Traffic in 1965 (Registration in 1965)" ( Traffic in 1922 = (Registration in 1922)," ( The second half of this proportion, therefore, represents the number of times which these types of traffic in each county would increase in -....,,..,. 120,000 10,000 9,000 8,000 7,000 o 6,000 5,000 E 4,000 x X3,000 L 5)-, Diagram Showing REILATION OF CENTRAL TRAFFIC TO REGISTRATION Nov. 1924 Note: The Central Traffic designates the Total Maximum Hourly Arterial Traffic crossing C( line drawn through the middle of an Area. Based upon the Traffic Census Map and County lRegistrations within New York 8& Its Environs. 10,000 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 I 1 1 141 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I i i i i v v = i i i i i i i i v i - i i:aloe i i i p i i i i i i i i i i I I i i i i i i i i i KO~2< i I I I I i i i I I I I i I - u 0) (4 -IS L c 0) U, -0 1,000 0 I, 900 9( 800 5% 700 7( 60C 61 50C 51 401 0,000 000 00 100 200 200 210 200 300 20oo 2 J Hil 3c I I I 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 I I.I.I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I 3 4 5 6 789 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Motor Vehicle Registration in Thousands FIG. 56 2! z1200 P00 such routes has approximately the same relation to the registration of the county. The results are shown in Fig. 57. For estimating conditions in 1965 it may be assumed that the three-fourths power can be taken for each of these curves and we obtain the proportion: the 43 years from 1922 to 1965. This value was found to vary from 9.6 to 2.4 for the various counties, the higher values representing the increases in traffic within the suburban and metropolitan districts and the lower values the increase in traffic within the rural districts. The values 104 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS obtained for each county are indicated on the map in Fig. 58. That shown for Manhattan is based on the registration of all of New York City except the borough of Richmond, as Manhattan serves as a traffic center for all that district. traffic obtained for each county was distributed over the various arterial county roads in direct proportion to the 1922 traffic, some adjustments being made for changed conditions with the completion of the Bear Mountain bridge and im 20,000 u L au io,000 9,000 L 8,000 0 7,000 6,000 5,000 X ~ 4,000 41o~ - 3,000, 2,000 10,000 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 lUTEI i 3 i i i i i i i i I I i i I I I I I i i i i i 7K i i i i i i i i i ý 1 i I I I i I i i l l I i i I I I I E 1 l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Lo K P T4TE H I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I 1_1 I I I I Yvtvr vTTr lII1T1 rrrrKI I7 L I * 1 L I I I I I II~ 'e, A i i i i i i i i i i i i iii0 3,000 2,000 0 4 -0) E C) 1,000 900 800 700 600' 500 400 300 200 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II 1 1.000 Diagram Showing RELATION OF CIRCUMFERENTIAL TO REGISTRATION Nov. 1924 TRAFFIC 7z 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 Note: The Circumferential Traffic desighates the Total Maximum Hourly Traffic entering and leaving an Area. Based upon the Traffic Census Map and County Registrations within New York 8c Its Environs. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I,. I I I I. I I.... -.. &-- W 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Motor Vehicle Registration in Thousands FIG. 57 200 Using only the registration within the borough the ratio would have been 1.8, which is undoubtedly too low. It must be remembered that these ratios refer only to traffic on the main arteries and that ratios for total traffic may be somewhat different. The total central and circumferential proved facilities between New York City and New Jersey. Application of First and Second Methods Using the results obtained by these two methods as a basis, final estimates were determined ESTIMATES OF FUTURE TRAFFIC 105 upon from which a 1965 maximum hourly traffic map was made. To show the increase from 1922 to 1965 the 1922 map was redrawn at a scale which could also be used for the later date. Figs. 59 and 60 show these two maps. The probable amounts of traffic at other hours or on other days of the week can be computed by the use of the curves under Periodical Variation of Traffic (pages 74 to 77). There was a remarkably close check between changes in traffic referred to in defining the third method of estimating traffic. Fig. 61 indicates the growth of traffic from 1910 to 1923 on various highway routes in different parts of the metropolitan area. Available records are of little use for future estimates as the intensive use of the motor vehicle started at such a recent date. It is indicated that there has been a higher annual rate of increase in traffic in the highways within the center of the district than on those which FIG. 58 the results obtained by the two independent methods, and Table XV (pages 109 and 110) has been prepared to show the results obtained for certain of the more important routes. As noted in the table the largest discrepancies between the two methods are readily explained by the assumptions made as to future routing of traffic. Third Method A study has also been made of the annual would come in the class of exits and entrances. It appears that traffic has been doubling every four to eight years. If this were continued until the year 1965 it would mean that traffic on the various routes would increase far beyond the figures indicated by the distribution method, and it is believed that no such rates of increase are probable. The total increase in traffic on all of the Hudson River ferries to Manhattan Island from 1919 to 1923 was approximately 30 per cent, which is a considerably lower increase than is 106 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS NEW YORK AND ENV\RONS HIGHWAY TRAFFIC CENSUS 19zz22 SHOWING GRAPH\CALLY THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF VEHICLES PASSING GIVEN POINTS WITHIN AN HOUR 0 5 10 SCALE IN MILES 500 - 1000 a s1500 VEHICLES PER HOUR Within the central area the diversion of traffic is too great for a proper aralysis on this scale. REGiONAL PLAN OF NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS ENGINEERING DIVISION FIG. 59 ESTIMATES OF FUTURE TRAFFIC 107 I anbOry / / I Bruns it NEW YORK AND ENVIRONS ESTIMATED HIGHWAY TRAFFIC 1965 SHOWING GRAPHICALLY THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF VEHICLES PASSING GIVEN POINTS WITHIN AN HOUR 0 5 to SCALE IN MILES S500 1000 5000 VEHICLES PER HOUR Within the central area the Traffic is too great to be shown on the scale used REGIONAL PLAN OF NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS ENGINEERING DIVISION FIG. 60 108 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS indicated in the curves in the diagram. A study of these statistics indicates that this relatively low increase was due to the fact that there is still a very large percentage of horse-drawn vehicles using the ferries south of 42d Street. It is believed that with the completion of vehicular of motor vehicles only which have used the ferries south of 42d Street from 1914 to 1923. It appears that this traffic increased very rapidly from 1914 to 1918, and during the past five years the curve corresponds very closely with the others shown on the diagram. 1) 15 L 1~ () 0 E z> C) n Nassau Boulevard, as planned, would empty into Lakeville Road, which would limit its capacity for through traffic. Either Albertson Road or the Motor Parkway (now under private ownership) should be developed as an outlet to the proposed Grand Central Parkway. Mapped to city line, no outlet provided. Mapped as separate street to city line, but now diverted to Jericho Turnpike within city limits. SIf extended into Nassau County would furnish an out\ let for Hollis Avenue. Mapped to city line, no outlet provided. Suitable for through route if necessary connections are made at both ends. Mapped to city line, no outlet provided. > Construction authorized in 1924. C) Importance for through traffic will be decreased after opening of Jamaica Bay Boulevard. 1-1 oo3 750 3,000 600 3,600 600 1,200 750 1,500 700 700 700 750 3,500 3,500 3,500 4,500 Side 900* 450 1,000 500 750 1,500 700 1,400 800 3,200 750 4,500 700 2,800 * Estimated 114 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS VEHICULAR TRAFFIC CAPACITIES OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED ARTERIAL HIGHWAYS TO AND FROM THE METROPOLITAN DISTRICT c/e 3A, C~ e~L SCALE iN MILESS eq 0 1 2 3 4 5 DEC. 1924 ' e - Existing Highways ---- Proposed Highways 0 * HCD Jo/7 00 So. Orcn e Ave. /QL FIG. FACILITIES COMPARED WITH FUTURE TRAFFIC DEMANDS 115 IIh I I m rr CII G( ~k~ B a = Maxilmum r1922 Traffic Count b.= Maximum Possible Traffic under Existiing Conditions c = Maximum Possible Traffic under Proposed Conditions Scale of Vehicles per Mour 0 5,000 1000 I 0 5,000 10,000 ~\~ce Ave.Exten Hempstead Turnpike Murdock Ave. Central Ave. 120thAve.(Zuider Ave.) Merrick Road L Cohdql, OcUle vcrJ4 'Rockaway Boulevard ipire Ave.(Broadway) Regional Plan of New York and Its Environs Engineering Division 116 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS 0 Cl) H z Cl) U 0 l) Cz zS C-HZ Cl 0Cl) UH vz H C 4-J i Cl.cC 4-J c', 4 a) 7l Cd CC C' cC Cl Ci Ci 'C -a ci Cl ci 04LC Ci'O Ul) cl) CRrt ^ o W M ' C- C> 0 0 0 "0 3 - CCo 0 C 0 CO Cl Cl wC C M Cl C C') C4-- C- 0 0?.5 -C-C-8). -CO ___O 0_ Il I d 0 - 0. - --C-- I? 0 0 _ to o ci C) U U 00 0 0 0 Iz z z z_ ^ >> > >< > "-L ~ ^ ^ "rI fZ z 0 z (I) < ~ Z cn M Co h-< * Estimated. FACILITIES COMPARED WITH FUTURE TRAFFIC DEMANDS 119 been provided. For those streets which enter New York City the street widths given are those shown on the New York City map, although the full width has not been acquired in all cases. The total possible capacity of the present four principal routes, if each was fully developed in accordance with the proposed traffic conditions, would be 16,200 vehicles per hour, and the estimated 1965 traffic along these, or parallel routes, has been estimated as 31,900 vehicles per hour. (See Table XV, page 109.) It appears that the new routes proposed would amply provide for this traffic, assuming a slight adjustment in its distribution in accordance with the capacities provided in different parts of the district. Staten Island.--On Staten Island there are now four main arterial routes, each of which (due to the restricted communication with other parts of the area) carried in 1922 only a part of its possible capacity. Better connections are planned by the municipal authorities for the east end of Southside Boulevard, and Northfield Boulevard has been mapped as an additional route which will become of greatly increased importance if better highway communication is established with New Jersey. If Southside Boulevard is also extended to Tottenville on the west, as planned, the five routes indicated in the diagram would readily handle such through traffic as may be expected in 1965. Metropolitan New Jersey.-There are indicated 16 existing highways which now serve as exits and entrances for the metropolitan section of New Jersey, and four additional routes which either will or might readily be provided. One of the latter is being considered by the State of New Jersey in connection with the problem of providing access to the Holland vehicular tunnels being constructed under the Hudson River, two of them would result from improved connections across the Hackensack meadows, and the fourth would be a logical outlet for the suggested Hudson River bridge between Fort Lee and Washington Heights. As shown on the 1922 highway traffic map (Fig. 6, page 33), the principal traffic is now carried by the following seven routes:-Frelinghuysen Avenue, Springfield Avenue, Park Avenue, Bloomfield Avenue, Passaic Avenue, Pater son Plank Road and Bergen Pike. These roads carried in 1922 a maximum hourly traffic equal to 55.2 per cent of their total capacity of 9,925 vehicles per hour. It is estimated that in 1965 these or parallel routes will be called upon to carry a total of 35,250 vehicles per hour, or more than three and one-half times their present capacity. W'Vestchester County.-The southern part of Westchester County presents a difficult situation, due to the short distance between the Hudson River and Long Island Sound and the resultant converging of traffic. There are at present nine arterial routes crossing the New York City and Westchester County boundary. There is being provided by Westchester County two additional highways which will require connections within New York City, and one other additional route is indicated. Conditions have been considerably relieved in 1923 and 1924 by the opening of part of the Bronx River Parkway. The present maximum capacity of existing routes is estimated at 11,525 vehicles per hour, and the estimated 1965 traffic on the same or parallel routes is 33,700 vehicles per hour, or approximately three times this capacity. The maximum capacity of all the routes shown under proposed conditions is 34,225 vehicles per hour, which shows that all the indicated facilities would barely be sufficient to handle this traffic if it were distributed in accordance with the capacities of the separate routes. 3. Central Area The existing and ultimate hourly vehicular traffic capacities in the north and south avenues in the business section of Manhattan, as these avenues exist at the end of the year 1924 and as they would be with the removal of certain obstructions, are shown in Table XXII and in the diagram in Fig. 63. The capacities were computed on a lane basis, these being established for various types of streets in accordance with Table XVI, page 111. Several improvements in this part of the borough of Manhattan have been completed during the years 1923 and 1924 and have considerably increased the capacity of the north and south avenues. These include the widening of the roadways on sections of Lexington, Madison and Park Avenues, the removal of 120 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS the elevated railway spur on Sixth Avenue north. of 53d Street, and the removal of the trolley tracks on First Avenue between 23d and 58th Streets. The additional proposals which are Avenue, Seventh Avenue, and that part of Ninth Avenue north of 34th Street; Replacing the Third and Sixth Avenue elevated railways by subways; VEHICULAR Diagram Showing TRAFFIC CAPACITIES ON NORTH BOROUGH OF MANHATTAN, NEW AND SOUTH AVENUES YORK CITY L 0 Q) a~0 U) ^u Is 48TH STREET L o 4,000 U) - 3,000 20 U) I?,000 U) 28TH STREET FIG. 63 shown in the table and diagram are such as have been frequently made and have already received serious consideration. They are as follows: The removal of trolley tracks from Lexington Construction of a viaduct on the east side of the Grand Central Terminal, and widening of the roadways of Park Avenue north of that terminal; TABLE XXII.-BOROUGH OF MANHATTAN--NEW YORK CITY. MAXIMUM HOURLY VEHICULAR TRAFFIC CAPACITIES ON NORTH AND SOUTH AVENUES, 14TH STREET TO 59TH STREET, UNDER EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS Maximum traffic Maximum Existing conditions at close of 1924 counts possible Proposed conditions of December, traffic 1922, and per lane January, 1923 C1 Avenue Width in feet Street Roadway Obstructions within street line MIovMov- Total lanes hourly Per moving lane Existing 1924 conditions Proposed conditions Obstructions remaining within street line Roadway width in feet I I I I I I I I I I FIRST AVENUEa North of 23d Street SECOND AVENUE a North of 23d Street THIRD AVENUE LEXINGTON AVENUE North of 23d Street PARK AVENUE 45th to 57th Streets South of 42d Street FOURTH AVENUE MADISON AVENUE 42d to 69th Streets 21st to 42d Streets FIFTH AVENUE SIXTH AVENUE BROADWAY SEVENTH AVENUE EIGHTH AVENUE NINTH AVENUE North of 34th Street South of 34th Street TENTH AVENUE North of 34th Street South of 34th Street ELEVENTH AVENUE 100 100 100 75 140 140 100 80 75 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 60 60 60 51 2x27 2x36 60 54 45 55 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 None Trolley tracks and elevated railway columns Trolley tracks and elevated railway columns Trolley tracks None None Trolley tracks Trolley tracks None None Trolley tracks and elevated railway columns Trolley tracks Trolley tracks Trolley tracks ) Trolley tracks and ele- j vated railway columns Trolley tracks Railroad tracks Railroad tracks 1,550 892 1,231 1,393 2,336 1,452 1,907 2,764 1,655 2,400 1,676 2,329 939 939 1,743 605 388 223 308 464 584 363 477 691 414 600 419 582 235 235 436 151 700 400 400 600 750 750 600 600 700 750 400 600 600 600 400 400 600 400 400 750 400 600 700 750 750 600 600 750 750 600 600 750 600.700 400 600 700 700 None Trolley tracks and elevated railway columns Trolley tracks None None None Trolley tracks Trolley tracks None None Trolley tracks Trolley tracks None Trolley tracks Elevated railway columns Elevated railway columns and trolley tracks Trolley tracks None None 60 60 60 51 2x45b 2x36 60 54 45 55 60 60 60 60 60 60 r" Moving fi1 lanes CO 0 4 4 0 4 4 8 T 6 4 4 z 3 4 > 4 4 4 4 60 60 60 a Second Avenue elevated b North of 46th Street. railway follows First Avenue south of 23d Street and Second Avenue north of 23d Street. 122 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS Removal of the New York Central Railroad tracks from Tenth and Eleventh Avenues; Improved traffic regulation on First, Madison and Seventh Avenues. The diagram shows existing traffic as of January, 1923, the capacity at that date and at the close of 1924, and the maximum possible traffic if the proposals listed above are carried out. It is very obvious that the existing traffic in the neighborhood of 48th Street is very near the maximum possible under existing conditions, and that about the only appreciable opportunity for increased traffic is on those avenues east of Third Avenue or west of Eighth Avenue. In the neighborhood of 28th Street there is still considerable leeway on all of the avenues. A comparison with 1923 traffic conditions is given in Table XXIII. TABLE XXIII.-MAxIMUM CAPACITY OF MANHATTAN AVENUES AS COMPARED WITH 1923 TRAFFIC Capacity under Capacity under Vehicles 1924 existing proposed per conditions conditions All avenues maximum crossing hour January Vehicles Per cent Vehicles Per cent 1923 per of 1923 per of 1923 hour traffic hour traffic 48th Street 23,420a 31,200 133 39,400 168 28th Street 14,900b 29,500 198 34,850 234 a Interpolated. between 42d Street and 59th Street counts. b Interpolated between 14th Street and 42d Street counts, with estimates for those avenues which do not cross 14th Street. These figures may at first appear a very considerable increase, but when they are considered together with the probable increase in traffic it is seen that they are insufficient and that some other large scale corrective measures will soon be imperative. It appears, in fact, that even with the proposals carried out the point of saturation will be reached at 48th Street in about the year 1930, and at 28th Street in about the year 1934, Park Avenue, as planned, will have by far the largest capacity of any of the north and south avenues. Between 34th and 40th Streets this will correspond to 4,500 vehicles per hour, and between 46th and 72d Streets to 6,000 vehicles per hour. Between these two sections is the Grand Central Station with, at the present time, a viaduct on only the west side. Traffic counts made by the city authorities indicated that this viaduct presents a bottle-neck condition, enabling it to carry a very heavy traffic per lane. The bridge across 41st and 42d Streets can acommodate four lanes of traffic. With the proposed new viaduct on the east side of the Grand Central it should be possible for two of these lanes to proceed on each side of the station. In order that vehicles may manipulate the turn between the roadway on the south side of the station and the viaduct over 42d Street it will probably be necessary to round off the corners at this point. It would appear that the bottle-neck conditions referred to would then enable the viaducts to carry the 4,500 vehicles per hour which is estimated as the capacity of Park Avenue south of this point. NEW YORK AND ENVIRONS SHOWING THE / HIGHWAY SYSTEM...c o,. J... T C2 4R X: * 1 0 SCALE IN MILES W O NOV. 1924 LEGEND- wick EXISTING ADOPTED BUT NOT I MPROVE0 Den PRINCIPAL HIGHWAYS a a - - Lakec PARKWAYS OR BOULEVARDS -..-. - /--"c-cSECONDARY HIGHWAYS OTHER HIGHWAYS - - PRINCIPAL FERRIES......, Naire dai / 'ww iv'''"' ^ ^ ^^ \'< Erron \ No anaan We s Noro REGIONAL PLAN OFl NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS y ENGINEERING DIVISION FIG. 64 Somevill coney koAd REGIONAL, PLAN OF"/__.,, NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS ENGINEERNNG DM5ION FIG. 64 00 town SUB PLAN OF 1< ' NASSAU AND SUFFOLK COUNTIES LONG ISLAND SCALI IN HILK$ XII. SUMMARY OF SOME OF THE MOST IMPORTANT HIGHWAY PROPOSALS FROM VARIOUS SOURCES There are certain proposals affecting the general highway system in the region which have been advanced by state and county authorities and which are reasonably certain of fulfilment. The most important of these are shown in Fig. 64, which also indicates the present highway system. The existing facilities are classified as Principal Highways, Parkways or Boulevards, Secondary Highways and Other Highways, their importance being based upon their suitability and availability for through traffic. The principal proposals indicated are the new connection for the New Jersey end of the Holland vehicular tunnels from Manhattan to Jersey City, the suggested straightening of the highway along the west shore of the Hudson River between Nyack and Haverstraw, and new connections west of the Hudson River to the roadways in the Bear Mountain section of the Palisades Interstate Park. The proposed parkways shown are in Westchester and Nassau Counties and in the boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens of the City of New York. The large number of proposals which have been made by both official bodies and individuals for the relief of the highway traffic situation indicates that the importance of this question is fully realized. There is given below a very brief summary of some of the most important of such suggestions. Some of them were first proposed a good many years ago and have been endorsed by various individuals and organizations, and several have actually been authorized by public authorities. All of them are being taken into consideration in the development of a regional plan. It is hoped that their presentation may promote discussion that will be helpful in arriving at a practicable solution. The various proposals have been grouped in accordance with the classification of highways adopted in the first part of this report. ARTERIAL AND CIRCUMFERENTIAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM New York A new highway in Brooklyn and Queens, crossing the East River on the Hell Gate bridge, connecting plazas of the Queensboro and the Williamsburg bridges and extending to Atlantic Avenue, Brooklyn. A tri-borough bridge connecting Queens, Manhattan and the Bronx, and furnishing highway connection between these boroughs without the necessity of passing through the congested parts of Manhattan. The Interborough Parkway, in Queens, connecting Highland Park and Forest Park, and furnishing a necessary link in the Brooklyn and Queens parkway system. A new highway through the northern part of Nassau and part of Suffolk Counties, furnishing an outlet to the proposed Nassau Boulevard and a possible extension of the proposed Long Island parkway system. An Ocean Boulevard on the south shore of Long Island to follow the outer sand bars from the Rockaway peninsula to Southampton. An additional north and south thoroughfare through New Rochelle to extend from the Boston Post Road through the City Park at Fifth Avenue and to extend eventually to Scarsdale. The widening of North Avenue and Rose Street in New Rochelle to improve existing north and south facilities. The widening of Riverdale and Warburton Avenues in Yonkers to provide a suitable outlet for a widened Riverdale Avenue in the Bronx. The construction of a new drive north of Bear Mountain in the Palisades Interstate Park to permit one-way roads connecting with the new Hudson River bridge. An additional entrance to Palisades Interstate Park from Sloatsburg to the Seven Lakes drive at Kanohwahke Lakes. New Jersey Highway bridges over Arthur Kill from Staten Island to Elizabeth and Perth Amboy. A bridge or tunnel across Kill van Kull connecting Bayonne and Staten Island. 123 124 HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS A parkway system in Union County utilizing the Elizabeth and Rahway River valleys. An Ocean Boulevard along the east coast of Monmouth County to be under state control from Atlantic Highlands to Spring Lake. Connecticut The widening of the roadway of the Boston Post Road to 36 feet from the New York State line to Bridgeport. This work was started by the State of Connecticut in 1923. A parallel to the Boston Post Road through the city of Bridgeport utilizing North Avenue and Boston Avenue. EXITS AND ENTRANCES TO THE METROPOLITAN CENTER New York Improved connections between the south end of the Bronx River Parkway and the Grand Boulevard and Concourse. A Riverside driveway to extend from the proposed Hendrik Hudson memorial bridge at Spuyten Duyvil into the city of Yonkers. A system of elevated driveways in the borough of Brooklyn to connect with the Manhattan Bridge. The development of Conduit Boulevard along New York City water supply property in the southern part of Queens and Nassau Counties. A new boulevard (Nassau Boulevard) across the northern part of Queens County from Elmhurst to the city line. A 170-foot boulevard (New Street) to extend from Kings Highway in Brooklyn to the proposed Conduit Boulevard in Queens County. The development of Atlantic Avenue, Brooklyn and Queens, as a boulevard by placing in subway all of the Long Island Railroad tracks which are not already underground. A combined rapid transit and parkway route to extend across Queens County to the city line. A vehicular tunnel under the Harlem River in the neighborhood of Third Avenue. New Jersey A highway and railroad bridge across the Hudson River to 57th Street, Manhattan. A highway bridge from Fort Lee, New Jersey, to Manhattan in the neighborhood of Fort Washington Park. Five additional vehicular tunnel tubes between Manhattan and New Jersey. A new highway to connect the Canal Street vehicular tunnels (Holland tunnels) with the Lincoln Highway in Elizabeth, by-passing the congested parts of both Newark and Elizabeth. Temporary or permanent vehicular ferries across the Hudson River from 14th Street, 34th Street, 59th Street and 86th Street, Manhattan. A new viaduct across the New Jersey Junction Railroad in Hoboken to provide for the increased traffic expected from the vehicular tunnels. BOROUGH OF MANHATTAN The widening of Allen Street to furnish a southern outlet to First Avenue. The widening of the roadway of Central Park West to provide for eight lanes of traffic, the trolley tracks to be removed to Columbus Avenue. New cross-town streets, 360 feet in width, to be developed at certain points south of 59th Street by acquiring entire blocks between existing cross-town streets. A viaduct east of the Grand Central Station, and an extension of the existing viaduct on the West Side to 46th Street. The improvement of Riverside Park to the waterfront, including the construction of a new roadway above the New York Central Railroad tracks. The widening of Sixth Avenue from 34th to 59th Streets; the removal of the elevated railway and substitution of a subway; the extension of Sixth Avenue south to Canal Street. The addition of two-story "super-streets," one between Second and Third Avenues and one between Ninth and Tenth Avenues. These are proposed in connection with the development of a suburban rapid transit system. The construction of a light-traffic elevated roadway above the central parking strip in Seventh Avenue from 1l0th Street to the Harlem River. Li(f) oi 01 vr~ H> )I t-J 0*) I., 0 0 03 at01 Mi.2:i o)cr 0aL1 ` O I 0' 00d at c I, 2: 64 4u -a 17z O P '0 *L/) '-I Q1 F 0 r 0, 0 0v, d4 Z Z aj irli k. m~ Y El; 8v4 4-'Z z L 0 zc."4l I,) Photo furnished by Bronx Parkway Commission VILEW,AND -C ZOSS -M1CTI ON -AT -TYPICAL1DO] NIT -ON'.B ZONXD tVLL.PA&,KWAY 04 0 1 e P A kK VWA Y> ýCQ055ECF1ON 0OF ONX-RJVLZ-PAP.KwAY -LOOKING -0 NOIT -VOM LAST -?W-40 ST. FIG. 66 HIGHWAY PROPOSALS FROM VARIOUS SOURCES 125 The removal of the Third Avenue elevated railway and substitution of a subway, increasing the, importance of the avenue as a north and south thoroughfare. Various proposals for elevated driveways on West Street to furnish an extension of Riverside Drive to the southern end of Manhattan Island. Some of these proposals are coupled with plans for a belt line railroad. The widening of Varick Street and Seventh Avenue to furnish facilities for handling the vehicular tunnel traffic at Canal Street. The extension of Madison Avenue south to Broadway and the widening of either Wooster Street or Greene Street to furnish an outlet to southern Manhattan. Fig. 65 shows typical cross-sections of arterial routes within the New York region. An outstanding example of successful parkway development is the Bronx River Parkway which connects Bronx Park in New York City- with the Kensico Reservoir in Westchester County. This is ill~ustrated by a photograph and crosssection in Fig. 66. There are, many other places within the area which present opportunities for similar treatment. XIII. URGENT PROJECTS AND METHODS OF APPROACH TO FURTHER STUDIES 1.A Few Highway Projects of Urgent Importance The studies thus far made of the highway traffic problem in New York and its environs give some indication of the character of specific projects which Should receive very careful consideration. Many of these must be planned primarily by the local communities in which they occur, but all local plans should be related to a general plan of the whole region. The followýNing brief summary is offered as an indication of the nature of the highway projects which are being studied by the committee and as a suggestion to the various municipalities within the area. ARTERIAL AND CIRCUM1VFERENTIAL HIGHWAY SYSTEMN 1. A by-pass route north of the congested part of Manhattan Island to connect New Jersey with the mainland of New York State east of the Hudson River. 2. A new highway inland from the existing Shore Road in Monmouth County, to provide more direct access from northern New Jersey to the shore resorts. 3. The necessary legislation and adoption of a program to make possible the eventual development of a parkway route along the Morris Canal west of Paterson. 4. A new route to provide better connection from Bridgeport and Norwalk to the Hudson River bridge at Bear Mountain. 55. The development of a parkway system west of the Hudson River, corresponding to that being developed by Westchester County on the east, which will connect the Palisades Interstate Park with the Essex County Parkw~ay sy-stemn via the Saddle and Passaic River valleys. EXITS AND ENTRATNTCES TO THE METROPOLITAN CE NTER 1. Development of new arterial routes in the central and southern part of Long Island, which will help to relieve congestion on existing highways and provide connections with Brooklyn which will by-pass congested points in that borough and the borough of Queens. 2. An additional general traffic route parallel to the Boston Post Road between New Rochelle and Bridgeport. 3. The adoption of a program which would provide for a future parkway route from southern Westchester County to Bridgeport. 4. A circumferential route from the Queens terminal of the proposed tni-borough bridge to the vicinity of Fort Hamilton, Brooklyn, by-passing congested districts. Kings Highway should form part of this route. 5. Extension of Riverside Drive to connect with existing roads in Yonkers, with a diagonal connection to the proposed Tibbitts Brook Parkway. BOROUGH OF MANHATTAN 1. Removal of obstructions in north and south avenues so as to increase their present capacity. 2. Development of new routes along the Hudson and East River waterfronts for through traffic. 3. Development of a highway along the Manhattan side of the Harlem River to connect the north and south avenues and make them more available for through traffic. 2., Need of Co-operation It is not intended that this report should offer any definite proposals toward the solution of the highway traffic problem, but it is hoped that it will give some indication of the difficulties inherent in the problem, of the way in which it can be approached, of the necessity for dealing with the problem as a related part of the whole question of civic growth in a wide region, and of the part which the Committee on Regional Plan of New York and Its Environs can take in findingsolutions. The essential requirem'ent is a con URGENT PROJECTS AND METHODS OF APPROACH TO FURTHER STUDIES 127 stant co-operation between the different communities and the various official and civic organizations which are interested in an efficient development of the region. There are certain welldefined ways in which the staff of the Committee can most advantageously co-operate in approaching further studies of the problem, and among these are the following: 1. By the continued collection of available data bearing directly upon the subject and by a study of those principles to be observed in the various and many details of the problem. 2. By making this information available as soon as possible for the various communities within the area in the hope that it may not only give them a realizationI of the difficulties to be overcome but may help them in the solving of their own local proj ects. 3. By helping to acquaint each of the communities with what is being done along these lines by their neighbors, not only so that they may profit by good examples but so that the plans of each of themn may be co-ordinated. 4. By showing the essential relationship between traffic, transit and transportation, and between these things and uses and bulk of buildings as part of the whole problem of distribution within the metropolitan area. 5. By preparing, after careful study and with the assistance of the best expert advice dbtainable, a comprehensive regional plan which would include a proper system of highway development and an effective and practical solution for the ever-increasing highway congestion. As an unofficial body planning for the benefit of the whole New York region the Committee will bring impartial judgment to bear upon problems involving the areas of over four hundred communities with divergent views. MONOGRAPHS of the REGIONAL PLAN OF NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS engineering Series Monograph Number One HIGHWAY TRAFFIC IN NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS, by HAROLD M. LEWIS. (127 pages, 67 illustrations and diagrams.) Price $2.00 Net &conomic Series Dealing with Present Trends and Probable Future Developments in Land Utilization in the Metropolitan Area Monograph Number One THE CHEMICAL INDUSTRY, by MABEL NEWCOMER. (49 pages, 7 maps.) Price $1.00 Net Monograph Number Two THE METAL.INDUSTRY, by VINCENT W. LANFEAR. (49 pages, 6 maps.) Price 75 cents Net Monograph Number Three THE FOOD MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES, by FAITH M. WILLIAMS. (62 pages, 6 maps, 1 graph.) Price 75 cents Net Monograph Number Four THE WOOD INDUSTRIES, by MARK C. MILLS. (53 pages, 5 maps, 1 graph.) Price 75 cents Net Monograph Number Five THE TOBACCO PRODUCTS INDUSTRY, by Lucy WINSOR KILLOUGH (58 pages, 7 maps, 9 graphs.) Price 75 cents Net Monograph Number Six THE PRINTING INDUSTRY, by A. F. HINRICHS (54 pages, 10 maps, 3 graphs.) Price 75 cents Net Monograph Number Eleven THE WHOLESALE MARKETS, by GEORGE FILIPETTI (69 pages, 20 maps.) Price 75 cents Net The following are in preparation: Monograph Number Seven THE MEN'S WEAR INDUSTRY, by B. M. SELEKMAN Monograph Number Eight THE WOMEN'S GARMENT INDUSTRY, by HENRIETTE R. WALTER Monograph Number Nine THE TEXTILE INDUSTRY, by W. J. COUPER Monograph Number Ten THE FINANCIAL DISTRICT, by R. W. ROBY Monograph Number Twelve THE RETAIL SHOPPING DISTRICT, by L. M. ORTON Order from REGIONAL PLAN OF NEW YORK AND ITS ENVIRONS 130 EAST 22D STREET, NEW YORK