The dispersed pattern of development of communities like the Town of Huntington has been imposed largely by the automobile, by the availability of cheap fuel supplies, and by the commitment of the federal government to construction of a far-flung highway network. Because of this development, many of our residential areas are remote from the centers of employment and commerce within our Town.

Now we must decrease our reliance on the automobile. Substantial assistance from the federal government in the form of operating subsidies for community public transportation and capital funds for construction of bicycle paths will be required to help us make this shift to alternative forms of transportation.

Just as highway construction has provided jobs, acquisition of rights-of-way and construction of bicycle paths could help put our people back to work. Unemployment now stands at 8.2% in neighboring Nassau County and at 10.2% in our own County of Suffolk. The number of unemployed are substantial, since the combined population of thees two counties totals 2.7 million. This exceeds the population of twenty-five of our fifty states!

As we review the history of federal transportation policy, priorities have been set to respond to the needs of cities and of rural areas. It is clear that federal

priorities must be revised to provide long-term solutions to the transit problems that now face the Town of Huntington and our sister towns on Long Island. We cannot finance the effort by real property taxes which become more regressive every year. Therefore, we must look to the federal government to help solve these problems.

The Highway Trust, generated by taxes on gasoline, is the obvious source for federal funds which would enable us to provide alternatives to the automobile. We urge the Committee and Congress as a whole to consider retaining the Highway Trust intact, while permitting local communities to draw on these funds to finance alternative modes of community transportation.

TESTIMONY OF KENNETH C. BUTTERFIELD, SUPERVISOR OF THE
TOWN OF HUNTINGTON, HUNTINGTON, SUFFOLK COUNTY, N.Y.

Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. HOWARD. Please proceed as you wish.

Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of the subcommittee, I am here today to suggest priorities for a nationwide surface mass transportation policy. I appreciate this opportunity to discuss it from the vantage point of living in that grey area of a suburban community. We are not rural; we are not a city. We fall in between.

Although some of our population density is likened to a rural area, others are densely populated and could be likened to a city. So we have problems that are a part of the rural makeup as well as the city.

In the past the Federal Government has laid great stress on completion of a network of Interstate highways. More recently, we have seen a shift to support for failing railroad systems, commuter rail lines, and inner city mass transportation systems. Now we believe Congress must give serious attention to the growing need for alternatives to the automobile in the suburban communities which comprise the most rapidly growing segment of our population.

The town of Huntington is a municipality, 100 square miles in area, located on the north shore of Long Island in New York State. Our population is more than 215,000. To put the size of the town in perspective, our population exceeds that of Corpus Christi, Tex.; Columbus, Ga.; Scranton, Pa.; and Syracuse and Albany, New York State, all considered urban areas of heavy population density.

The town of Huntington is far from a bedroom community for New York City. Only 30 percent of our wage earners commute to the city. By far the majority earn their incomes within the town or in adjacent communities. It is my hope that this committee, when considering national transportation policy, will focus attention upon the immediate needs of towns such as Huntington for alternatives to automobile transportation. We need Federal support for community transportation to provide mobility within the communities where our people live and work.

In 1937, our town hired a nationally-recognized transportation consultant to plan a mass transit development program for Huntington. This study, funded 80 percent by the Urban Mass Transportation Administration, was submitted to the town board in June 1974.

It recommended a 5-year transit development program, including acquisition of 17 buses to transport commuters to the Long Island Railroad, to expand fixed route services to centers of employment, commerce, and recreation, and to support the activities of local agencies and institutions.

The study also recommended a cooperative taxi program with subsidies for point-to-point transportation for the elderly and the handicapped.

At present, there is some bus service within the township, but because of the limited numbers of fixed routes and the infrequency of service, it cannot meet the needs of potential users. Our study indicated that if adequate transit service were provided within the town, approximately 25 percent of our population, or more than 50,000 riders, would support the system.

The potential user groups include many who have no alternatives to public transportation-those below the poverty level who cannot afford to own and operate an automobile, youngsters age 16 to 19 who do not have access to automobiles, and many senior citizens.

Analysis of the need for transit service to Huntington shows that there are many people in the town whose mobility is severly restricted because of a lack of public transportation. The reduction in the quality of their lives due to lack of mobility is strongly felt.

Lack of public transportation also imposes various indirect costs on the town, its residents, and public agencies. These include payments for transportation to medical facilities for social service clients, costs and inconvenience related to transporting nondrivers, and costs related to unemployment which are aggravated by lack of transportation.

Many programs which provide recreational, educational and medical services are not fully utilized simply because people have no way to get to locations where services are available.

Lack of a transit program also diminishes the town's capability to deal on a broad basis with concerns such as environmental protection and energy conservation.

The town of Huntington acted immediately upon the recommendations of our transportation consultants. Trusting that the Federal Government would sustain a continued commitment to local mass transportation systems, we have submitted an application to the Urban Mass Transportation Administration for the purchase of 17 buses over a 5-year period.

The town will absorb a part of the capital cost of acquisition, but beyond this capital investment, operating deficits over 5 years will average $400,000 per year. The town must rely on the Federal Government to absorb most of that deficit to keep our buses on the road.

The transportation study upon which we based our public transit development program, although thorough and detailed, did not fully come to grips with the impact of the so-called energy crisis and its disastrous effects on the price of gasoline.

Since the drastic increase in gasoline prices, there have been unprecedented demands for better public transportation and also for creation of a network of bicycle paths throughout the town.

Families with one or two cars have traditionally driven their cars to work or to commuter rail stations and have transported themselves and their children by automobile to activities after school and on weekends.

Now, many people have come to accept the fact that private cars can no longer be the sole source of transportation for our community. People are willing to ride buses and they are calling for a viable system

of bicycle paths to provide supplementary transportation for themselves and their families.

The town of Huntington is sympathetic to their demands. One objective of a national mass transportation policy must be to conserve energy, and widespread utilization of bicycles should be an integral part of that policy.

As in Europe, where gasoline prices have been high for years, more and more people are now using bicycles for essential transportation, as well as for recreation. Besides conserving energy, increased use of bicycles will reduce air pollution and help keep our citizens physically fit.

Unfortunately, as bicycle ridership increases, so do the number of highway accidents involving bicycles. As a matter of fact, our county of Suffolk in which our town is located, has the highest number of accidents involving bicycles among the counties in New York State. This is precisely because bicyclists are forced to use roads constructed years ago for vehicular traffic, roads with no margin of safety for bicyclists.

Just as the town cannot bear the costs of operating deficits for public transportation systems without Federal aid, we cannot tax our citizens to the extent which would be needed to acquire land and construct a safe, viable network of bicycle paths.

There are 800 miles of roads in the town of Huntington. Funds to undertake even a reasonable first step toward construction of a bicycle path network are simply not available.

There has been a limited attempt to fund bicycle paths through Federal aid to urban systems and through the land and water conservation fund. Unfortunately, use of Federal funds from either of these sources places bicycle paths in direct competition for Federal aid with much needed highway improvements and park developments. Suffolk County has taken a small step toward creating a network of bicycle paths by appropriating capital budget funds for this

purpose.

However, we have found that safety considerations preclude construction of bicycle paths within most of our existing rights-of-way and the funds are too limited to finance land acquisition.

The dispersed pattern of development of communities like the town of Huntington has been imposed largely by the automobile, by the availability of cheap fuel supplies, and by the commitment of the Federal Government to construction of a farflung highway network. Because of this development, many of our residential areas are remote from the centers of employment and commerce within our town.

Now we must decrease our reliance on the automobile. Substantial assistance from the Federal Government in the form of operating subsidies for community public transportation and capital funds for construction of bicycle paths will be required to help us make this shift to alternative forms of transportation.

Just as highway construction has provided jobs, acquisition of rights-of-way and construction of bicycle paths could help put our people back to work.

Unemployment now stands at 8.2 percent in neighboring Nassau County and at 10.2 percent in our own county of Suffolk. The number of unemployed are substantial, since the combined population of these

two counties totals 2.7 million. This exceeds the population of 25 of our 50 States.

As we review the history of Federal transportation policy, priorities have been set to respond to the needs of cities and of rural areas. It is clear that Federal priorities must be revised to provide long-term solutions to the transit problems that now face the town of Huntington and our sister towns on Long Island.

We cannot finance the effort by real property taxes which become more regressive every year. Therefore, we must look to the Federal Government to help solve these problems.

The highway trust, generated by taxes on gasoline, is the obvious source for Federal funds which would enable us to provide alternatives to the automobile. We urge the committee and Congress as a whole to consider retaining the highway trust intact, while permitting local communities to draw on these funds to finance alternative modes of community transportation.

Mr. HOWARD. Thank you very much, Mr. Butterfield, for your fine statement on behalf of your town and suburban towns like it around the country.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York, Mr. Ambro. Mr. AMBRO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I did know the tack that Mr. Butterfield's testimony would take. But I am intrigued by his emphasis on bicycle paths.

Are you suggesting that through Federal funding we provide incentives as well as standards and legislation to have communities like Huntington develop bicycle paths on federally funded roads?

Mr. BUTTERFIELD. On roads, whether they are Federal or State, the problem we find now is that more people are using bicycles, and consequently more people are being injured and killed.

What we think is that by using bicycles we are taking away the burden of the parents to transport them as chauffeurs, daily, to their places of activity, and the adults who use bicycles to get to the stores and places of recreation.

Within the last 6 months there has been an outpouring of interest for the construction of a viable network within our town. I think the realization has finally come to the middle class that resides in the suburbs can no longer afford the gasoline prices, and they are willing now to use bicycles and to tell their children to go downtown on a bike. I think this has just happened recently.

It is not the physical fitness aspect, but it is a realization that we can no longer depend upon the car. So in answer to your question, I do not think it is germane where these bicycle paths are located with respect to Federal or county or State roads. I think it has to be produced, and I think it is a consideration of this committee that the safety aspects of our citizens be considered inasmuch as bicycles are considered vehicles under most State laws.

I think they have to be dealt with when you consider construction of new highways and the total transportation policy for the country.

Mr. AMBRO. I have no quarrel whatsoever with doing more to encourage the construction of safe bicycle paths. In fact, when I was a youngster in Brooklyn, why, we were able to go along Eastern Parkway and King's Highway on set-aside bicycle paths, long distances,