Preview
FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
JOHN VENTO, a minor by his Mother and Natural Guardian KIMBERLY
VENTO, Individually, AFFIDAVIT
Plaintiff,
-Against- Index No.: 038664/2012
DARNELL M. EDWARDS, ISLANDWIDE TRANSPORTATION
INCORPORATED, THE TOWN OF BROOKHAVEN and OTO TRANSPORT,
INC
Defendants
TOWN OF BROOKHAVEN,
Third-Party Plaintiff,
-Against- Index No.: 770257/2014
KIMBERLY VENTO and JOSEPH VENTO,
Third Party Defendants
iSLANDWIDE TRANSPORTATION INCORPORATED,
Second-Third Party Plaintiff, Index No.: 770270/2014
-Against-
KIMBERLY VENTO and JOSEPH VENTO,
Second-Third Party Defendants
DARNELL M. EDWARDS and OTO TRANSPORT, INC,
Third-Third Party Plaintiff, Index No.: 770337/2014
-Against-
KIMBERLY VENTO and JOSEPH VENTO,
Third-Third Party Defendants.
STATE OF FLORIDA
SS:
COUNTY OF COLLIER
NICHOLAS BELLIZZL P.E., being duly sworn, deposes, and says under penalties of
perjury:
001
FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022
1. lama Professional Engineer licensed in New York and New Jersey, and have, for
many years, qualified in courts throughout New York as an expert witness specializing in
accident reconstruction and traffic, highway, and civil engineering. I am a self-employed
consulting forensic engineer and accident reconstructionist. I have a Bachelor's in Civil
Engineering from the City College of New York and a Master of Science in Transportation
Planning from the Brooklyn Polytechnic Institute. A copy of my curriculum vitae
discussing my background and qualifications is attached as Exhibit 1.
2. Relevant here, I have managed civilengineering projects in the New York
Metropolitan area that have included highway and roadway engineering, traffic impact
assessments, safety and geometric studies, highway corridor improvements, roadway
improvements, site plan design, signalization and other issues. I spent two years working
for the New York City Department of Transportation as a Deputy Director, Bureau of
Traffic Operations, LIC, N.Y. (1977-1979), and five years as a CivilEngineer for the New
York City Transit Authority (1972-1977). Ihave also served as Principal Investigator for
Federal Highway Administration TrafficSafety Studies. For more than 25 years, Ihave
provided independent forensic engineering consultation and analysis of civil
engineering, highway engineering, construction worker, and premises evaluations
including various types of vehicular accident analysis and reconstruction.
Scope of Investigation & Evaluation
3. I have been retained by Plaintiff'scounsel, Aaronson Rappaport Feinstein &
Deutsch, LLP, to evaluate the traffic control conditions that existed in front of 21
Plandome Road in South Sound Beach, New York at the time of the two-vehicle collision
002
FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022
that occurred there on April 5, 2012. Vehicle 1 (Darnell Edwards, taxi) was traveling
westbound on Plandome Road. Vehicle 2 (John Vento, pit bike) was traveling eastbound
on Plandome Road. The two vehicles collided head-on at the apex of the vertical hill
crest in the vicinity of 21 Plandome Road, approximately 100 feet to the west of its
intersection with Peconic Road.
4. I was asked to evaluate the subject collision location's geometry and traffic
control devices to determine if the subject location was designed, maintained, operated,
controlled, monitored, inspected, repaired, managed, and supervised in conformance
with good and commonly accepted safe industry standards under American Association
of State Highway and Transportation (AASHTO) guidelines and standards. Institute of
Transportation Engineers' (ITE), residential streets guidelines, and Federal Manual of
Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) guidelines and standards, and, if there were
deviations, determine if these deviations were a substantial factor in causing the subject
collision and John Vento's resulting injuries. A true and accurate copy of my report,
dated January 18, 2020, detailing my findings and opinions regarding causal factors
contributing to the accident is incorporated by reference and is annexed hereto as
Exhibit 2. All of the opinions in my report are stated to a reasonable degree of accident
reconstruction certainty.
Investigation
5. In preparation for analyzing this matter, I reviewed the following documents: the
subject Police Accident Report and Police Investigation Documents, and the Police
Accident Reports for two other collisions in the same location (2009 and 2014), all
003
FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022
completed by the Suffolk County Police Department; photographs taken of the scene of
the collision, taxi, and pit bike by investigating officers; historical maps, aerials, and
street view photographs of the subject location; historical astronomical and
meteorological records for the date of the subject collision; aerial Images and Street
Views, Google Maps; manufacturer's specifications and dimensions of the Ford Crown
Victoria (taxi)and the Coolster Speedmax (pit bike); deposition transcripts of Darnell
Edwards, Matthew Van Helden, John Vento {2 sessions), Lynn Weyant (2 sessions).
Detective Lawrence Gualtieri, Detective Sergeant James McGuinness, Police Officer
James Rios (2 sessions). Police Officer Jodi Rios, Police Officer Lucas Moeller, Tracy
Moriarty; Collision Reconstruction Report, Focus Forensics, Daniel J. Melcher, P.E.,
October 3, 2019; Accident Reconstruction Report, John Desch Associates, Inc.,John A.
Desch, P.E. and Garry W. Moore, May 13, 2020; Neighborhood Traffic Safety Study, South
Sound Beach, Town of Brookhaven, Fay, Spofford and Thorndike of New York, Inc.,
August 2004, Revised - February 2005; First Supplemental Verified Billof Particulars;
Supplement Response to Plaintiff'sDiscovery Demands, March 24, 2015; and Town of
Brookhaven's Response and Affidavit to the Supplemental Notice To Admit.
Plandome Road^
6. The collision occurred on Plandome Road between its intersections with Peconic
Road (to the east) and Pinelawn Road (to the west). Plandome Road was an asphalt
paved two-way, two-lane residential street that carried one lane of travel in each of the
1 The measurements of Plandome Road in this section are based upon the data and information set
forth in the Collision Reconstruction Report authored by Daniel J. Melcher, P.E., of Focus Forensics,
which was prepared in accordance with good and accepted industry practices.
004
FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022
general east-west directions. Plandome Road formed a "T" intersection with Pinelawn
Road at itswest end. Plandome Road was approximately 0.28 mile in total length, or
about 1,500 feet. The Road formed additional intersections with Peconic Road, Parkside
Road, and Hewlett Drive before it came to a dead end at its eastern terminus to the east
of Hewlett Drive.
7. The total width of Plandome Road was a non-uniform and irregular 19-20 feet.
The speed limit at the location was 30 mph. Driveways were located on both sides of the
roadway. The street had no concrete curbs or sidewalks and parking was permitted on
both sides of the roadway.
8. The uphill grade of the roadway leading to the hillcrest where the collision
occurred in the eastbound (Vento) direction was 10-12%. In the taxi's (vehicle #1)
westbound direction (Edwards), it was 12-15%. The line of sight between motorists and
vehicles traveling up the hillon either side of the hillwas limited and restricted. The
available sight distance was 70-80 feet traveling in either direction going up the hill. The
hill is a vertical curve in the roadway.
9. There were no lane lines or pavement markings of any type on Plandome Road.
There were no posted speed limitsigns or advisory speed limit signs or plaques along
Plandome Road. The Town's speed limit was 30 mph. There were no reduced speed limit
signs posted on Plandome Road. There were no warning signs posted in either direction
approaching the subject hill crest, such as "Hill Blocks View," "Restricted Sight Distance,"
"Hidden Driveway," or "Limited Sight Distance." There were no parking prohibition signs
posted on either side of the roadway. Plandome Road did not have any traffic control
devices.
005
FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022
10. Plandome Road had several hillcrests. The subject collision occurred at the
steepest hill crest. The apex of the subject hillcrest, or vertical curve, was located in
front of the houses located at 18 and 21 Plandome Road. At the time of the subject
collision, in the westbound direction that Mr. Edwards (taxi) was traveling in, there was a
vehicle parked in the north shoulder of the narrow street at the crest of the hill.This
resulted in the taxi driving to the left of the centerline of Plandome Road.
Police Investigation & Testimony
11. The crash report prepared by the Suffolk County Police Department indicates
that the collision took place on April 5, 2012 at approximately 4:00 p.m., when
conditions were daylight, dry, and clear. Meteorological records confirmed that there
was no precipitation, the sky was cloudy, and there were no weather limitations to
visibility.The police narrative described that a head-on collision occurred between a
2003 Ford Crown Victoria and a Coolster Speedmax pit bike. The police photographed
the scene and documented physical scene evidence using a Total Station.
12. Officer James Rios of the Suffolk County Police Department was the responding
officer that completed the Police Accident Report for the 2012 Vento collision, and had
an independent recollection of the scene. When he arrived, Mr. Vento was lying in the
middle of the street on Plandome Road, with the taxicab to his west. He was familiar
with Plandome Road as part of his patrol. It was a fairly straightroad with an up and
down hill crest. The road was fairlynarrow, with no pavement markings or warning
signage. Street parking was permitted throughout Plandome Road, with no locations of
parking restriction. Officer Rios observed that there was limited visibility at the hill crest
006
FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022
west of Peconic intersection near 18 Plandome Road, and that this limited visibility was a
contributing factor to the collision which occurred at or near the apex of the hill. As you
are approaching the crest of the hill, you can't see down the road until you get near the
top of the hill. He noted the code for "view obstructed / limited" as a contributing factor
in his report.
13. Officer Jodi Rios of the Suffolk County Police Department was the Crime Scene
officer assigned to this collision. She arrived at the location around 5:30 p.m., and
remained until 9 p.m. She used a Total Station to take measurements of physical
evidence she observed at the scene, and also photographed the scene to document
what she had observed. She observed and photographed the fact that Plandome Road
had a blind spot as you're coming to the top of the hill in either direction. She observed
that the roadway was very narrow and tight, combined with the steepness of the hill,
which resulted in limited sight distance in both directions. She photographed the final
rest positions of the Ford and the motorbike, the blood stain area, debris fields,and
gouges and fluid trail on the asphalt leading toward the final rest area of the motorbike.
14. Detective Lawrence Gualtieri was one of the responding officers to the subject
collision. He observed that Plandome Road was narrow, did not have any parking
restriction signs, and had no pavement markings. The collision occurred near 21
Plandome Road, at a hillcrest where there was limited visibility in both directions. The
taxi driver and the motorbike operator would not have been able to see each other until
they got to the top of the hill. The taxi driver told Detective Gualtieri that he did not see
the pit bike rider. Plandome Road was not a comfortable road because of its narrow
width and hills.
007
FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022
15. Detective Sergeant James McGuInness of the Suffolk County Police Department
was one of the responding officers to the subject collision, along with Detective Sergeant
Gualtieri. His recollection was that Plandome Road was a difficultstreet, with limited
visibility. The collisionhad occurred at or in close proximity to the crest of the hill. The
limited sight distance was a contributing factor to the collision involving the taxicab and
the motorbike.
16. According to the testimony of Suffolk County Police Department Officer Lucas
Moeller, he had been assigned to sector car 701, and had patrolled the area including
Plandome Road, from July 2008 through 2014. During his routine patrols, he had noticed
that it was a very narrow, hilly road, which was very uncomfortable to drive on, where if
vehicles are traveling in opposite directions it'sdifficult toget past without hitting. If
there was a car parked on the side of the road on Plandome, he observed that drivers
tended to drive closer to the middle of such a narrow street. He personally drove closer
to the center of Plandome because of how narrow and uncomfortable the road was to
drive on and because of parked cars on the side of the road. He was familiar with the
presence of signs on other roads in Town of Brookhaven (the "Town") that warned of
limited sight distance and advisory speeds for those conditions, but did not recall such
signage on Plandome.
Similar Vehicular Collisions
17. An opposite-direction, head-on collision occurred on Plandome Road on January
9, 2009, at the same hillcrest as the subject collision.Officer Moeller completed the
traffic crash report of the 2009 collision. The vehicles collided front left to front-left near
008
FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022
the middle of the roadway at or near the crest of the large hill west of Peconic. Because
of the narrowness of the road, both drivers were across the imaginary centerline in the
road when they collided. The westbound driver in the 2009 collision indicated in the
crash report narrative that he never saw the oncoming vehicle due to the grade of the
hill.Based on his observations and experience. Officer Moeller listed code #69 - "View
Obstructed/Limited" inthe MV-104A report for "Apparent Contributing Factors" to this
collision. From a traffic engineer's perspective the fact that the 2009 accident occurred
at night and that one of the vehicles involved in the collision was an SUV is not relevant
to the condition of Plandome road on April 5,2012 in regard to the narrowness of the
roadway and the limited stop sight distance caused by the vertical curve or hillcrest. The
fact that one of the vehicles was a SUV and that the accident occurred at night did not
affect that limited or obstructed view caused by the hill crest was a contributing factor to
the collision.
18. An opposite-direction collision occurred on Plandome Road at the hill crest west
of Peconic on January 25, 2014. Officer James Rios completed the traffic crash report of
the 2014 collision. The narrative of his report stated that there was very low limited
visibility at the hillcrest and that the street was fairly narrow, and the eastbound and
westbound vehicles sideswiped each other at the hill crest. Both vehicles were
attributed "Apparent Contributing Factors" of "View Obstructed/ Limited." The
statement of the eastbound driver indicated, "I was driving east on Plandome Road near
number 18 or 20 when I was suddenly hit head-on by other vehicle. Other car was in the
middle of the road." The statement of the westbound driver indicated, "I was driving
westbound on Plandome when a driver driving eastbound hit me head-on." This 2014
009
FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022
incident occurred at or near the same hill crest as the 2012 (Vento) collision, and there
were no warning signs in the area of this hill crest in 2014.
Surrounding Streets
19. Other roadway locations throughout the Sound Beach area were posted with a
warning sign with advisory speed limit where similar dangerous conditions of roadway
geometry existed. The following is a summary of those locations:
â– Oakwood Avenue was a two-lane, two-way, non-striped residential street
that had a Limited Sight Distance sign with a 20 mph advisory speed
plaque posted for the westbound travel direction. In the eastbound
direction, a limited sight distance sign with a 20 mph speed advisory
plaque was also posted just prior to the crest of the hill.
â– Ferndale Avenue near Glenwood Avenue was a two-lane, two-way, non-
striped residential street that had a Limited Sight Distance sign prior to a
combined horizontal and vertical curve. The sign was posted below a Stop
Ahead sign.
â– Block Island Drive was a two-lane, two-way, non-striped residential street
that had a Limited Sight Distance sign with a 15 mph speed advisory
plaque prior to a horizontal curve in the northbound direction. A Limited
Sight Distance sign, without a speed advisory plaque, was posted in the
southbound travel direction prior to the same horizontal curve.
â– Curtis Drive was a two-lane, two-way, non-striped residential street that
had a Limited Sight Distance sign with a 20 mph speed advisory plaque in
the northbound direction. The sign was visible in in Google Street View
imagery from April 2012. There were no sight distance signs posted for
southbound traffic.
â– Tyler Avenue was a two-lane, two-way, non-striped residential street that
had a Limited Sight Distance sign in the southbound direction. There were
no sight distance signs posted for northbound traffic.
â– Sound Beach Blvd, near Orient Rd, was a two-lane, two-way, striped road
with some residential driveway access. The sign inventory indicated a
10
010
FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022
Limited Sight Distance sign with a 10 mph speed advisory plaque was
placed on the northbound approach to a vertical curve. An intersection
warning sign with a 15 mph advisory speed plaque was located in the
approximate inventoried location.
â– Islip Drive was a two-lane^ two-way, non-strlped residential street that had
a Limited Sight Distance sign with a 15 mph speed advisory plaque in the
northbound direction. There were no sight distance signs listed on the
sign inventory for southbound traffic,however, a Limited Sight Distance
sign with a 15 mph speed advisor sign was visible inGoogle Street View
imagery.
â– Hollis Drive was a two-lane, two-way, non-striped residential street that
had a Limited Sight Distance sign with a 15 mph speed advisory plaque
prior to a horizontal curve inthe northbound direction. A Limited Sight
Distance sign with a 15 mph speed advisory plaque was posted in the
southbound travel direction prior to the same horizontal curve.
Testimony of Lynn Weyant
20. Ms. Weyant was employed by the Town as their Director of Traffic Safety. She
testified regarding the scope of the Neighborhood Traffic Safety Study in 2004/2005.
Much data was collected during this study. But the restricted and limited sight distance
at the subject hillcrest, the narrowness of the street, and the lack of parking
prohibitions were not identified or addressed in this study. Her testimony also confirms
that the subject collision location did not have any warning signs of any type whatsoever
at any time prior to the date of the collision.
21. Ms. Weyant testified that her department followed the Federal MUTCD, as well
as the NYSDOT's MUTCD. She testified that police accident reports, i.e.,MV-104 A's,
were inputted into the Town's data base. When asked if the prior head-on collision dated
January 9, 2009, which listed "limited" or "obstructed view", was inputted into the
Town's data base she replied "yes". Ms. Weyant testified that the cost of a warning sign
11
011
FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022
was approximately $1,200. She testified that no traffic safety studies of Plandome Road
were triggered by the neighborhood trafficstudy. A study was performed after the
subject collision dated April 5, 2012 in late 2012. A work order (#12-38226) was created
on January 8, 2013 and two handicapped warning signs were installed on January 13,
2013.
22. Ms. Weyant testified that the 2004 Neighborhood Traffic Safety Study did not
include an evaluation of the vertical curves on Plandome Road. She testified that her
office followed AASHTO Green Book design standards for roadway width and the 2009
Federal MUTCD. Ms. Weyant was shown a section from the 2009 Federal MUTCD. The
Federal MUTCD included Table 6C2, page 555, which is stopping distance as a function of
speed table, which was 200 feet for a 30 mph speed. Ms. Weyant testified that she did
not know what this table meant. She testified that the width of the road could influence
signage. Ms. Weyant testified that she did not know what stopping sight distance was.
She referred to a "traveling sight distance", which she described as the sight distance
available when you are at a stop sign.
23. Ms. Weyant testified that the Neighborhood Traffic Safety Study evaluated
accident reports for the time period of June 1999 - May 2002, a three-year period. The
report classified high accident roadways stratified as to east/west and north/ south
roadways. The report indicted four east/west roadways as high accident roadways and
one of these four roads was Plandome Road. No further work or study was done after
Plandome Road was listed as a high accident location in the study.
Evaluation
12
012
FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022
Safe Stopping Sight Distance Standards
24. The AASHTO Design Manual sets forth the Safe Stopping Sight Distance (SSSD)
standards in Tables in the AASHTO Green Book. AASHTO's Green Book has been
published many times over many years. The SSSD minimum design standards have not
changed in any of those publications. SSSD includes both the distance traveled while a
motorist is reacting to a condition and the brake stopping distance. For stopping sight
distance calculations, the height of a driver's eye is 3.5 feet above the roadway and the
object is 2 feet above the roadway. Reaction distance isthe distance traveled by the
vehicle from the instant the driver sees an object necessitating a stop to the instant the
brakes are applied. Braking distance isthe distance traveled by the vehicle from the
instant brake application begins to the instant when the vehicle has come to a complete
stop. The reaction distance is based on the reaction time of the driver and the speed of
the vehicle. Stopping sight distance isdefined as the sum of reaction distance and
braking distance. Per AASHTO, the minimum required stopping sight distance for a
vehicle traveling at 30 mph is as follows:
Vehicle Speed Reaction Distance Braking Distance Summed Distance Stopping Sight
(MPH) (ft.) (ft.) (ft.) Distance (ft.)
15 55.1 21.6 76.7 80
30 110.3 86.0 196.7 200
25. As indicated above, a minimum of 200 feet is the minimum sight distance
required for a vehicle traveling at 30 mph. As a result, the subject vertical curve formed
by the hill crest which had a SSSD of 70-80 feet, offered a motorist a substandard, unsafe
13
013
FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022
and inadequate safe stopping sight distance. The Federal MUTCD in Table 6C2, contains a
chart for SSSD standards based on speeds. For a 30 mph speed, the minimum SSSD is
200 feet, which is the exact number contained in the AASHTO Design manual, as
discussed above. Ms. Weyant, the Town's Director of Traffic Safety, testified in her
deposition that she did not know what this table meant.
26. The 2009 Federal MUTCD addresses Signs in Part 2. Warning signs are addressed
in Chapter 2C. "Warning Signs and Object Markers." Reduced speed limit ahead signs are
addressed in Section 2C.38. The "Hill Blocks View" warning signs (sign W7-6) is in Section
2C.18 which states the following:
01 A HILL BLOCKS VIEW (W7-6) sign fsee Figure 2C-4) mav be used
in advance of a crest vertical curve to advise road users to reduce
speed as they approach and traverse the hill as only limited
stopping sight distance is available.
Guidance:
02 When a HILL BLOCKS VIEW sign is used, it should be
supplemented by an Advisory Speed (W 13-1 P) plaque indicating
the recommended speed for traveling over the hillcrest based on
available stopping sight distance.
27. As indicated above, the MUTCD contained standard warning signs to warn of the
limited sight and reduced/obstructed sight distance conditions that vertical curves in the
roadway cause. These warning signs are "Hill Blocks View" and "Reduced Speed Limit"
signs.
14
014
FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022
Roadway Width Standards
28. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) published their "Recommended
Guidelines for Subdivision Streets," A Recommended Practice of the ITE, in 1983 and
proposed revisions to it were made in 1989. The ITE recommended for low development
density (two or less dwelling units per gross acre) in level terrain (0-8 percent grade) and
rolling terrain (8.1-15 percent grade) street widths of 22-27 feet in 1983 and proposed
22-28 feet widths in 1989. Section 2.03.04 Pavement Width (1983) stated the following:
A minimum pavement width must allow safe passage of
moving traffic in each direction, exclusive of other
interferences, such as conventional curb parking. Curb
parking will occur occasionally within all residential
subdivisions. The rate of occurrence will be a function of
density, off-street parking code requirements, and local
ordinances. In very ow-density developments, large lots
with two-car garages and circular driveways are
commonplace. However, vehicle breakdowns and
occasional overflow parking indicate that even in the low-
density areas, provision should be made for the occasional
standing vehicle. This can be done by means of a shoulder
on one or both sides of the street. Such shoulder
development requires that curbs either be omitted or be
of the mountable or roll-type, when a narrow - such as 22-
foot (7-m) - road is used.
A second function of the shoulder is to provide for
pedestrians and bicycle riders.Curb parking isinfrequent
in very low-density areas and conflict should not normally
develop between shoulder parking and pedestrian or
bicycle rider usage.
An alternative approach for low-density development is
provision of a 27- foot (8-m) curbed street. Parking could
be prohibited on one side of the street under certain
conditions. This is based upon the assumption that the
community has required adequate off-street parking at
15
015
FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022
each dwelling unit. (See Section 2. 03.16, Off-Street
Parking.).
As density of lane use increases, the probability of curb
Preview
FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK JOHN VENTO, a minor by his Mother and Natural Guardian KIMBERLY VENTO, Individually, AFFIDAVIT Plaintiff, -Against- Index No.: 038664/2012 DARNELL M. EDWARDS, ISLANDWIDE TRANSPORTATION INCORPORATED, THE TOWN OF BROOKHAVEN and OTO TRANSPORT, INC Defendants TOWN OF BROOKHAVEN, Third-Party Plaintiff, -Against- Index No.: 770257/2014 KIMBERLY VENTO and JOSEPH VENTO, Third Party Defendants iSLANDWIDE TRANSPORTATION INCORPORATED, Second-Third Party Plaintiff, Index No.: 770270/2014 -Against- KIMBERLY VENTO and JOSEPH VENTO, Second-Third Party Defendants DARNELL M. EDWARDS and OTO TRANSPORT, INC, Third-Third Party Plaintiff, Index No.: 770337/2014 -Against- KIMBERLY VENTO and JOSEPH VENTO, Third-Third Party Defendants. STATE OF FLORIDA SS: COUNTY OF COLLIER NICHOLAS BELLIZZL P.E., being duly sworn, deposes, and says under penalties of perjury: 001 FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022 1. lama Professional Engineer licensed in New York and New Jersey, and have, for many years, qualified in courts throughout New York as an expert witness specializing in accident reconstruction and traffic, highway, and civil engineering. I am a self-employed consulting forensic engineer and accident reconstructionist. I have a Bachelor's in Civil Engineering from the City College of New York and a Master of Science in Transportation Planning from the Brooklyn Polytechnic Institute. A copy of my curriculum vitae discussing my background and qualifications is attached as Exhibit 1. 2. Relevant here, I have managed civilengineering projects in the New York Metropolitan area that have included highway and roadway engineering, traffic impact assessments, safety and geometric studies, highway corridor improvements, roadway improvements, site plan design, signalization and other issues. I spent two years working for the New York City Department of Transportation as a Deputy Director, Bureau of Traffic Operations, LIC, N.Y. (1977-1979), and five years as a CivilEngineer for the New York City Transit Authority (1972-1977). Ihave also served as Principal Investigator for Federal Highway Administration TrafficSafety Studies. For more than 25 years, Ihave provided independent forensic engineering consultation and analysis of civil engineering, highway engineering, construction worker, and premises evaluations including various types of vehicular accident analysis and reconstruction. Scope of Investigation & Evaluation 3. I have been retained by Plaintiff'scounsel, Aaronson Rappaport Feinstein & Deutsch, LLP, to evaluate the traffic control conditions that existed in front of 21 Plandome Road in South Sound Beach, New York at the time of the two-vehicle collision 002 FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022 that occurred there on April 5, 2012. Vehicle 1 (Darnell Edwards, taxi) was traveling westbound on Plandome Road. Vehicle 2 (John Vento, pit bike) was traveling eastbound on Plandome Road. The two vehicles collided head-on at the apex of the vertical hill crest in the vicinity of 21 Plandome Road, approximately 100 feet to the west of its intersection with Peconic Road. 4. I was asked to evaluate the subject collision location's geometry and traffic control devices to determine if the subject location was designed, maintained, operated, controlled, monitored, inspected, repaired, managed, and supervised in conformance with good and commonly accepted safe industry standards under American Association of State Highway and Transportation (AASHTO) guidelines and standards. Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE), residential streets guidelines, and Federal Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) guidelines and standards, and, if there were deviations, determine if these deviations were a substantial factor in causing the subject collision and John Vento's resulting injuries. A true and accurate copy of my report, dated January 18, 2020, detailing my findings and opinions regarding causal factors contributing to the accident is incorporated by reference and is annexed hereto as Exhibit 2. All of the opinions in my report are stated to a reasonable degree of accident reconstruction certainty. Investigation 5. In preparation for analyzing this matter, I reviewed the following documents: the subject Police Accident Report and Police Investigation Documents, and the Police Accident Reports for two other collisions in the same location (2009 and 2014), all 003 FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022 completed by the Suffolk County Police Department; photographs taken of the scene of the collision, taxi, and pit bike by investigating officers; historical maps, aerials, and street view photographs of the subject location; historical astronomical and meteorological records for the date of the subject collision; aerial Images and Street Views, Google Maps; manufacturer's specifications and dimensions of the Ford Crown Victoria (taxi)and the Coolster Speedmax (pit bike); deposition transcripts of Darnell Edwards, Matthew Van Helden, John Vento {2 sessions), Lynn Weyant (2 sessions). Detective Lawrence Gualtieri, Detective Sergeant James McGuinness, Police Officer James Rios (2 sessions). Police Officer Jodi Rios, Police Officer Lucas Moeller, Tracy Moriarty; Collision Reconstruction Report, Focus Forensics, Daniel J. Melcher, P.E., October 3, 2019; Accident Reconstruction Report, John Desch Associates, Inc.,John A. Desch, P.E. and Garry W. Moore, May 13, 2020; Neighborhood Traffic Safety Study, South Sound Beach, Town of Brookhaven, Fay, Spofford and Thorndike of New York, Inc., August 2004, Revised - February 2005; First Supplemental Verified Billof Particulars; Supplement Response to Plaintiff'sDiscovery Demands, March 24, 2015; and Town of Brookhaven's Response and Affidavit to the Supplemental Notice To Admit. Plandome Road^ 6. The collision occurred on Plandome Road between its intersections with Peconic Road (to the east) and Pinelawn Road (to the west). Plandome Road was an asphalt paved two-way, two-lane residential street that carried one lane of travel in each of the 1 The measurements of Plandome Road in this section are based upon the data and information set forth in the Collision Reconstruction Report authored by Daniel J. Melcher, P.E., of Focus Forensics, which was prepared in accordance with good and accepted industry practices. 004 FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022 general east-west directions. Plandome Road formed a "T" intersection with Pinelawn Road at itswest end. Plandome Road was approximately 0.28 mile in total length, or about 1,500 feet. The Road formed additional intersections with Peconic Road, Parkside Road, and Hewlett Drive before it came to a dead end at its eastern terminus to the east of Hewlett Drive. 7. The total width of Plandome Road was a non-uniform and irregular 19-20 feet. The speed limit at the location was 30 mph. Driveways were located on both sides of the roadway. The street had no concrete curbs or sidewalks and parking was permitted on both sides of the roadway. 8. The uphill grade of the roadway leading to the hillcrest where the collision occurred in the eastbound (Vento) direction was 10-12%. In the taxi's (vehicle #1) westbound direction (Edwards), it was 12-15%. The line of sight between motorists and vehicles traveling up the hillon either side of the hillwas limited and restricted. The available sight distance was 70-80 feet traveling in either direction going up the hill. The hill is a vertical curve in the roadway. 9. There were no lane lines or pavement markings of any type on Plandome Road. There were no posted speed limitsigns or advisory speed limit signs or plaques along Plandome Road. The Town's speed limit was 30 mph. There were no reduced speed limit signs posted on Plandome Road. There were no warning signs posted in either direction approaching the subject hill crest, such as "Hill Blocks View," "Restricted Sight Distance," "Hidden Driveway," or "Limited Sight Distance." There were no parking prohibition signs posted on either side of the roadway. Plandome Road did not have any traffic control devices. 005 FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022 10. Plandome Road had several hillcrests. The subject collision occurred at the steepest hill crest. The apex of the subject hillcrest, or vertical curve, was located in front of the houses located at 18 and 21 Plandome Road. At the time of the subject collision, in the westbound direction that Mr. Edwards (taxi) was traveling in, there was a vehicle parked in the north shoulder of the narrow street at the crest of the hill.This resulted in the taxi driving to the left of the centerline of Plandome Road. Police Investigation & Testimony 11. The crash report prepared by the Suffolk County Police Department indicates that the collision took place on April 5, 2012 at approximately 4:00 p.m., when conditions were daylight, dry, and clear. Meteorological records confirmed that there was no precipitation, the sky was cloudy, and there were no weather limitations to visibility.The police narrative described that a head-on collision occurred between a 2003 Ford Crown Victoria and a Coolster Speedmax pit bike. The police photographed the scene and documented physical scene evidence using a Total Station. 12. Officer James Rios of the Suffolk County Police Department was the responding officer that completed the Police Accident Report for the 2012 Vento collision, and had an independent recollection of the scene. When he arrived, Mr. Vento was lying in the middle of the street on Plandome Road, with the taxicab to his west. He was familiar with Plandome Road as part of his patrol. It was a fairly straightroad with an up and down hill crest. The road was fairlynarrow, with no pavement markings or warning signage. Street parking was permitted throughout Plandome Road, with no locations of parking restriction. Officer Rios observed that there was limited visibility at the hill crest 006 FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022 west of Peconic intersection near 18 Plandome Road, and that this limited visibility was a contributing factor to the collision which occurred at or near the apex of the hill. As you are approaching the crest of the hill, you can't see down the road until you get near the top of the hill. He noted the code for "view obstructed / limited" as a contributing factor in his report. 13. Officer Jodi Rios of the Suffolk County Police Department was the Crime Scene officer assigned to this collision. She arrived at the location around 5:30 p.m., and remained until 9 p.m. She used a Total Station to take measurements of physical evidence she observed at the scene, and also photographed the scene to document what she had observed. She observed and photographed the fact that Plandome Road had a blind spot as you're coming to the top of the hill in either direction. She observed that the roadway was very narrow and tight, combined with the steepness of the hill, which resulted in limited sight distance in both directions. She photographed the final rest positions of the Ford and the motorbike, the blood stain area, debris fields,and gouges and fluid trail on the asphalt leading toward the final rest area of the motorbike. 14. Detective Lawrence Gualtieri was one of the responding officers to the subject collision. He observed that Plandome Road was narrow, did not have any parking restriction signs, and had no pavement markings. The collision occurred near 21 Plandome Road, at a hillcrest where there was limited visibility in both directions. The taxi driver and the motorbike operator would not have been able to see each other until they got to the top of the hill. The taxi driver told Detective Gualtieri that he did not see the pit bike rider. Plandome Road was not a comfortable road because of its narrow width and hills. 007 FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022 15. Detective Sergeant James McGuInness of the Suffolk County Police Department was one of the responding officers to the subject collision, along with Detective Sergeant Gualtieri. His recollection was that Plandome Road was a difficultstreet, with limited visibility. The collisionhad occurred at or in close proximity to the crest of the hill. The limited sight distance was a contributing factor to the collision involving the taxicab and the motorbike. 16. According to the testimony of Suffolk County Police Department Officer Lucas Moeller, he had been assigned to sector car 701, and had patrolled the area including Plandome Road, from July 2008 through 2014. During his routine patrols, he had noticed that it was a very narrow, hilly road, which was very uncomfortable to drive on, where if vehicles are traveling in opposite directions it'sdifficult toget past without hitting. If there was a car parked on the side of the road on Plandome, he observed that drivers tended to drive closer to the middle of such a narrow street. He personally drove closer to the center of Plandome because of how narrow and uncomfortable the road was to drive on and because of parked cars on the side of the road. He was familiar with the presence of signs on other roads in Town of Brookhaven (the "Town") that warned of limited sight distance and advisory speeds for those conditions, but did not recall such signage on Plandome. Similar Vehicular Collisions 17. An opposite-direction, head-on collision occurred on Plandome Road on January 9, 2009, at the same hillcrest as the subject collision.Officer Moeller completed the traffic crash report of the 2009 collision. The vehicles collided front left to front-left near 008 FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022 the middle of the roadway at or near the crest of the large hill west of Peconic. Because of the narrowness of the road, both drivers were across the imaginary centerline in the road when they collided. The westbound driver in the 2009 collision indicated in the crash report narrative that he never saw the oncoming vehicle due to the grade of the hill.Based on his observations and experience. Officer Moeller listed code #69 - "View Obstructed/Limited" inthe MV-104A report for "Apparent Contributing Factors" to this collision. From a traffic engineer's perspective the fact that the 2009 accident occurred at night and that one of the vehicles involved in the collision was an SUV is not relevant to the condition of Plandome road on April 5,2012 in regard to the narrowness of the roadway and the limited stop sight distance caused by the vertical curve or hillcrest. The fact that one of the vehicles was a SUV and that the accident occurred at night did not affect that limited or obstructed view caused by the hill crest was a contributing factor to the collision. 18. An opposite-direction collision occurred on Plandome Road at the hill crest west of Peconic on January 25, 2014. Officer James Rios completed the traffic crash report of the 2014 collision. The narrative of his report stated that there was very low limited visibility at the hillcrest and that the street was fairly narrow, and the eastbound and westbound vehicles sideswiped each other at the hill crest. Both vehicles were attributed "Apparent Contributing Factors" of "View Obstructed/ Limited." The statement of the eastbound driver indicated, "I was driving east on Plandome Road near number 18 or 20 when I was suddenly hit head-on by other vehicle. Other car was in the middle of the road." The statement of the westbound driver indicated, "I was driving westbound on Plandome when a driver driving eastbound hit me head-on." This 2014 009 FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022 incident occurred at or near the same hill crest as the 2012 (Vento) collision, and there were no warning signs in the area of this hill crest in 2014. Surrounding Streets 19. Other roadway locations throughout the Sound Beach area were posted with a warning sign with advisory speed limit where similar dangerous conditions of roadway geometry existed. The following is a summary of those locations: â– Oakwood Avenue was a two-lane, two-way, non-striped residential street that had a Limited Sight Distance sign with a 20 mph advisory speed plaque posted for the westbound travel direction. In the eastbound direction, a limited sight distance sign with a 20 mph speed advisory plaque was also posted just prior to the crest of the hill. â– Ferndale Avenue near Glenwood Avenue was a two-lane, two-way, non- striped residential street that had a Limited Sight Distance sign prior to a combined horizontal and vertical curve. The sign was posted below a Stop Ahead sign. â– Block Island Drive was a two-lane, two-way, non-striped residential street that had a Limited Sight Distance sign with a 15 mph speed advisory plaque prior to a horizontal curve in the northbound direction. A Limited Sight Distance sign, without a speed advisory plaque, was posted in the southbound travel direction prior to the same horizontal curve. â– Curtis Drive was a two-lane, two-way, non-striped residential street that had a Limited Sight Distance sign with a 20 mph speed advisory plaque in the northbound direction. The sign was visible in in Google Street View imagery from April 2012. There were no sight distance signs posted for southbound traffic. â– Tyler Avenue was a two-lane, two-way, non-striped residential street that had a Limited Sight Distance sign in the southbound direction. There were no sight distance signs posted for northbound traffic. â– Sound Beach Blvd, near Orient Rd, was a two-lane, two-way, striped road with some residential driveway access. The sign inventory indicated a 10 010 FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022 Limited Sight Distance sign with a 10 mph speed advisory plaque was placed on the northbound approach to a vertical curve. An intersection warning sign with a 15 mph advisory speed plaque was located in the approximate inventoried location. â– Islip Drive was a two-lane^ two-way, non-strlped residential street that had a Limited Sight Distance sign with a 15 mph speed advisory plaque in the northbound direction. There were no sight distance signs listed on the sign inventory for southbound traffic,however, a Limited Sight Distance sign with a 15 mph speed advisor sign was visible inGoogle Street View imagery. â– Hollis Drive was a two-lane, two-way, non-striped residential street that had a Limited Sight Distance sign with a 15 mph speed advisory plaque prior to a horizontal curve inthe northbound direction. A Limited Sight Distance sign with a 15 mph speed advisory plaque was posted in the southbound travel direction prior to the same horizontal curve. Testimony of Lynn Weyant 20. Ms. Weyant was employed by the Town as their Director of Traffic Safety. She testified regarding the scope of the Neighborhood Traffic Safety Study in 2004/2005. Much data was collected during this study. But the restricted and limited sight distance at the subject hillcrest, the narrowness of the street, and the lack of parking prohibitions were not identified or addressed in this study. Her testimony also confirms that the subject collision location did not have any warning signs of any type whatsoever at any time prior to the date of the collision. 21. Ms. Weyant testified that her department followed the Federal MUTCD, as well as the NYSDOT's MUTCD. She testified that police accident reports, i.e.,MV-104 A's, were inputted into the Town's data base. When asked if the prior head-on collision dated January 9, 2009, which listed "limited" or "obstructed view", was inputted into the Town's data base she replied "yes". Ms. Weyant testified that the cost of a warning sign 11 011 FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022 was approximately $1,200. She testified that no traffic safety studies of Plandome Road were triggered by the neighborhood trafficstudy. A study was performed after the subject collision dated April 5, 2012 in late 2012. A work order (#12-38226) was created on January 8, 2013 and two handicapped warning signs were installed on January 13, 2013. 22. Ms. Weyant testified that the 2004 Neighborhood Traffic Safety Study did not include an evaluation of the vertical curves on Plandome Road. She testified that her office followed AASHTO Green Book design standards for roadway width and the 2009 Federal MUTCD. Ms. Weyant was shown a section from the 2009 Federal MUTCD. The Federal MUTCD included Table 6C2, page 555, which is stopping distance as a function of speed table, which was 200 feet for a 30 mph speed. Ms. Weyant testified that she did not know what this table meant. She testified that the width of the road could influence signage. Ms. Weyant testified that she did not know what stopping sight distance was. She referred to a "traveling sight distance", which she described as the sight distance available when you are at a stop sign. 23. Ms. Weyant testified that the Neighborhood Traffic Safety Study evaluated accident reports for the time period of June 1999 - May 2002, a three-year period. The report classified high accident roadways stratified as to east/west and north/ south roadways. The report indicted four east/west roadways as high accident roadways and one of these four roads was Plandome Road. No further work or study was done after Plandome Road was listed as a high accident location in the study. Evaluation 12 012 FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022 Safe Stopping Sight Distance Standards 24. The AASHTO Design Manual sets forth the Safe Stopping Sight Distance (SSSD) standards in Tables in the AASHTO Green Book. AASHTO's Green Book has been published many times over many years. The SSSD minimum design standards have not changed in any of those publications. SSSD includes both the distance traveled while a motorist is reacting to a condition and the brake stopping distance. For stopping sight distance calculations, the height of a driver's eye is 3.5 feet above the roadway and the object is 2 feet above the roadway. Reaction distance isthe distance traveled by the vehicle from the instant the driver sees an object necessitating a stop to the instant the brakes are applied. Braking distance isthe distance traveled by the vehicle from the instant brake application begins to the instant when the vehicle has come to a complete stop. The reaction distance is based on the reaction time of the driver and the speed of the vehicle. Stopping sight distance isdefined as the sum of reaction distance and braking distance. Per AASHTO, the minimum required stopping sight distance for a vehicle traveling at 30 mph is as follows: Vehicle Speed Reaction Distance Braking Distance Summed Distance Stopping Sight (MPH) (ft.) (ft.) (ft.) Distance (ft.) 15 55.1 21.6 76.7 80 30 110.3 86.0 196.7 200 25. As indicated above, a minimum of 200 feet is the minimum sight distance required for a vehicle traveling at 30 mph. As a result, the subject vertical curve formed by the hill crest which had a SSSD of 70-80 feet, offered a motorist a substandard, unsafe 13 013 FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022 and inadequate safe stopping sight distance. The Federal MUTCD in Table 6C2, contains a chart for SSSD standards based on speeds. For a 30 mph speed, the minimum SSSD is 200 feet, which is the exact number contained in the AASHTO Design manual, as discussed above. Ms. Weyant, the Town's Director of Traffic Safety, testified in her deposition that she did not know what this table meant. 26. The 2009 Federal MUTCD addresses Signs in Part 2. Warning signs are addressed in Chapter 2C. "Warning Signs and Object Markers." Reduced speed limit ahead signs are addressed in Section 2C.38. The "Hill Blocks View" warning signs (sign W7-6) is in Section 2C.18 which states the following: 01 A HILL BLOCKS VIEW (W7-6) sign fsee Figure 2C-4) mav be used in advance of a crest vertical curve to advise road users to reduce speed as they approach and traverse the hill as only limited stopping sight distance is available. Guidance: 02 When a HILL BLOCKS VIEW sign is used, it should be supplemented by an Advisory Speed (W 13-1 P) plaque indicating the recommended speed for traveling over the hillcrest based on available stopping sight distance. 27. As indicated above, the MUTCD contained standard warning signs to warn of the limited sight and reduced/obstructed sight distance conditions that vertical curves in the roadway cause. These warning signs are "Hill Blocks View" and "Reduced Speed Limit" signs. 14 014 FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022 Roadway Width Standards 28. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) published their "Recommended Guidelines for Subdivision Streets," A Recommended Practice of the ITE, in 1983 and proposed revisions to it were made in 1989. The ITE recommended for low development density (two or less dwelling units per gross acre) in level terrain (0-8 percent grade) and rolling terrain (8.1-15 percent grade) street widths of 22-27 feet in 1983 and proposed 22-28 feet widths in 1989. Section 2.03.04 Pavement Width (1983) stated the following: A minimum pavement width must allow safe passage of moving traffic in each direction, exclusive of other interferences, such as conventional curb parking. Curb parking will occur occasionally within all residential subdivisions. The rate of occurrence will be a function of density, off-street parking code requirements, and local ordinances. In very ow-density developments, large lots with two-car garages and circular driveways are commonplace. However, vehicle breakdowns and occasional overflow parking indicate that even in the low- density areas, provision should be made for the occasional standing vehicle. This can be done by means of a shoulder on one or both sides of the street. Such shoulder development requires that curbs either be omitted or be of the mountable or roll-type, when a narrow - such as 22- foot (7-m) - road is used. A second function of the shoulder is to provide for pedestrians and bicycle riders.Curb parking isinfrequent in very low-density areas and conflict should not normally develop between shoulder parking and pedestrian or bicycle rider usage. An alternative approach for low-density development is provision of a 27- foot (8-m) curbed street. Parking could be prohibited on one side of the street under certain conditions. This is based upon the assumption that the community has required adequate off-street parking at 15 015 FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/24/2022 05:36 PM INDEX NO. 038664/2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 420 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/24/2022 each dwelling unit. (See Section 2. 03.16, Off-Street Parking.). As density of lane use increases, the probability of curb