MINUTES OF MEETING OF THE A/GFTC TAC November 16, 2011
Members and Participants
Brian Abare South Glens Falls DPW
Stu Baker Town of Queensbury
Edward Bartholomew City of Glens Falls
Frank Bonafide NYSDOT
Robert Cherry NYSDOT
Kar en Hulihan NYSDOT
Edward Doughney Warren County DPW
Kevin Hajos Warren County DPW
Scott Sopczyk GGFT
Scott Tracy Washington County DPW
Michael Breault Washington County DPW
Michael Valentine Saratoga County Planning
Steve Sweeney NYS Canal Corporation
Aaron Frankenfeld A/GFTC
Kate Mance A/GFTC
Minutes of the Meeting
1. Welcome and Introductions : Aaron Frankenfeld called the meeting to order at
2. Visitor Issues: None present
3. NYSDOT Forward Four Initiative
A. Introduction : Aaron noted that all members of the Technical Advisory
Committee and the Policy Committee should have received letters from
the DOT Commissioner outlining the “Forward Four” policy, and that DOT
staff would go into greater detail concerning the contents of the l etter.
Frank Bonafide explained that the idea is to emphasize transportation
programming in a way that emphasizes preservation. This new Forward
Four policy includes four criteria: preserving the existing infrastructure,
prioritizing systems over facilitie s, maximizing of investment, and
sustainability. Safety is still a key concept, and the MPO and DOT need to
work together to decide what the priorities for the system are. He
introduced Rick Bennett and Tom Hoffman to explain the pavement
preservation and bridge preservation strategies.
B. Pavement Preservation Strategy : Rick Bennett presented a PowerPoint
show about the pavement preservation system. He explained that the goal
is preservation first, not preservation only. This system is based on
pavement scoring, and DOT will be reaching out to MPOs to implement a
statewide system. This pavement score data can be simply collected and
does not require expensive “e -score” equipment . The goal of the program
Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
11 South Street, Suite 203
Glens Falls, NY 12801
p: (518) 223 – 0086 f: (518) 223 – 0584
is to enable preventative maintenance to prolong the life of pavement
using mainly non -structural means. A key criteria is to select a treatment
based on the “window of opportunity”, which is determined by the
pavement score and the length of time a facility has been in that
condition. The DOT system is designe d to keep pavements at pavement
score 7 or higher. Once a pavement degrades below that condition, the
cost of repair rises exponentially. Using this strategy, a system can be
maintained for the same length of time with better than average condition
at a mu ch lower cost than versus a “worst first” strategy. In addition,
projects will be prioritized based on cost effectiveness in terms of $/VMT.
In the last round of prioritization, DOT Main Office did not always have
enough information for local system conditions. In future rounds, Rick
stressed that the BP (Beyond Preservation) forms should address
pavement condition and maintenance history, project timing, cost
effectiveness, and any other program justif ication, such as safety. Kevin
Hajos noted that Warren County already has a similar pavement str ategy
in place. Scott Tracy noted that Washington County has pavement
condition data which can be transmitted to DOT. Aaron noted that A/GFTC
collects pavement condition data, although it will take a few years to get
enough data to compile historic trends.
C. Bridge Preservation Strategy : Tom Hoffman presented a PowerPoint show
about the D OT strategy concerning bridges, which is a “maintenance first”
strategy. The goal is to avoid deferring maintenance, and then to do
reconstruction projects at the end of the bridge’s life. This is geared
towards bridges with condition ratings of 4.4 or less. An important
component is to focus projects only on the elements which ne ed to be
addressed, and not including things such as lights or decorative elements
if possible. In the long run, it will be cheaper to maintain a bridge properly
than to reconstruct a bridge prematurely. The DOT is pursuing “5-7”
projects, which are elemen t- specific improvements designed to bring a
deficient bridge to a condition rating between 5 – 7. Other project types
include painting, concrete repair, joint repair, cleaning, and wearing
surface maintenance. Investigation is an important part of this str ategy.
Tom showed several examples of bridge projects from the Region which
successfully implemented the bridge maintenance strategy. Frank noted
that another important consideration is to try to prevent the scope of
projects from increasing. Kevin stated that Warren County already uses its
own budget and labor to comp lete projects that fulfill the Forward Four
principles, and that federal funds have historically been used to complete
projects which cannot be completed in -house. Frank encouraged the
County to find ways to shift some of the preservation -type projects to the
TIP, which will make it easier to qualify for Marchiselli funds while
simultaneously freeing up some of the local funding for larger projects. To
keep preservation projects financially fea sible when using federal funding,
Frank recommends bundling smaller projects on a county -wide basis.
Aaron noted that the challenge has historically been to explain to the local
residents the reasoning behind using resources on bridges which are
functional ly obsolete, but are not yet at the end of the facility life.
4. MPO Administrative Items
A. Federal legislation update: Aaron stated that there is not much to report;
the House and Senate named conferees in April to negotiate a
compromise with their respective transportation bills. Discussions appear
to have stalled, with talks of another extension circulating; the current
extension expires at the end of June. This lack of availability of funding
estimates will undoubtedly make the TIP programming more challenging.
Funding is most likely to be flat -lined at best.
B. Host Agency agreement : Aaron stated that the Host Agency contracts
have not been approved by NYSDOT. This is not unique to A/GFTC; all but
one MPO in NYS are experiencing the same delay. Despite having been
transmitted to NYSDOT approximately 4 months ahead of the expiration of
the exsiting contract , the new contracts have still not been moved out of
NYSDOT and review from the Attorney General and OSC is still pending.
These layers of review are require d before reimbursement can take place.
What is unique to A/GFTC is that our March reimbursements were
mishandled and our host has not been paid for our expenses. The host
agency is not in a position to float payments in the long term. Delayed
vendor payments have resulted and are likely to continue.
5. Annual Work Program
A. Completed / Ongoing Activities
1) Queensbury commercial / industrial access road : Aaron reported
that the study has been transmitted to the Warren County Board of
Supervisors as a final d ocument.
2) Warren County Bicycling Master Plan : Kate Mance noted that, since
the last TAC meeting, all comments had been addressed, and the
Board of Supervisors approved the plan in April. The plan is
available online. The companion effort to the plan is re visions to
the A/GFTC bike map. The regional map side has been expanded to
include Granville and Lake Luzerne to encompass trails and
des ignated bicycle routes which were not included on the existing
3) Traffic engineering services
1. Signal warrant analysis – Bay / Cronin: Aaron noted that
the s tudy is complete. Kevin reported that there were three
alternatives identified by Creighton Manning Engineering .
The first is to change striping along Bay Road to provide
shared through -right lanes and separate l eft turn lanes, the
second would be to restrict l eft turns from Cronin with a
rais ed median , and the third step will be to signalize the
intersection. The County will start with the first scenario,
then wait a year to see if conditions improve. If not, the
second and possibly third options will be deployed. Aaron
not ed that the signal option, as well as a conceptual
round about, were less cost effective than the recommended
2. GFSD circulation issues – Aaron reported that a draft of the
Glens Falls School Circulation study has been completed by
Resource Syste ms Group, reviewed by District staff , and
presented to the Glens Falls School Board for review . The
report includes an estimate of anticipated traffic resulting
from the alignment of high school and middle school start
times , and recommended strategies to deal with the
increase in peak traffic. It is not anticipated that the School
Board review will result in significant changes to the
document. Some of the recommendations include
expanding the drop -off area, changing the location of on-
street parking along Sherman, encouraging counter-
clockwise circulation, and adding incentives to bike, walk, or
ride the bus to school.
3. Dix / Sagamore intersection evaluation : Aaron reported
that, similar to the Bay/Cronin project, A/GFTC initiated an
intersection evaluation at the request of the City of Glens
Falls . The City had requested a signal warrant analysis but
staff added an evaluation of the adjacent bikeway
intersection as part of the scope. This may help to address
some of the undesirable traffic operations at the bikeway
crossing . The Chazen Companies has initiated data
collection and Aaron will discuss with City officials at the
Common Council meeting of June 12 what they would like
by way of public involvement. The project should take about
3 months, and will i nclude a signal warrant and timing plan,
conceptual costs, and potential re -alignment of the bikeway
at the intersection.
4) Long Range Plan 2035 update – Aaron noted that staff will soon be
engaged with public outreach as part of the 2035 Long Range Plan
update. We will be reconsidering our advertising and surveying
methods as well as looking to use of online community forums. The
content of the survey could also stand for some revision. Kate is
working on exploring digital survey methods to facilitate greater
involvement. We would appreciate any assistance from interested
committee members. Staff is also exploring creating an online
interactive forum or social media outlet for this outreach effort.
5) Coor dinated Human Services Transportation Plan update – Kate
noted that, since the last TAC meeting, targeted stakeholder
outreach was conducted through an online survey and two open
houses. The feedback received was very helpful. The draft was
circulated to s takeholders, the TAC, and DOT, and comments were
received and incorporated. The final draft went through a public
review process as well and was noticed in the paper and posted
online. Staff received many comments which were outside of the
scope of the upd ate; however, these comments will create a strong
basis for the mobility management plan in the UPWP. Aaron noted
that he and S cott Sopczyk attended a Tompkins Co unty
Coordinated Public Transportation Committee meeting and met
with Dwight Mengel and Fernan do deAragon. They have had some
success in the Ithaca area in implementing service coordination ,
including pre -soliciting for FTA -eligible projects . A/GFTC will focus
on restart ing the Coordinated Services committee and build on
some of the ideas that were shared, with the goal of drafting a
mobility management plan with either Washington or Warren
County, depending upon interest. Scott noted that public
participation in the Coordinated Services committee has been a
challenge. Jocelyn Blanchard, representin g the Long Term Care
Council of Warren, Was hington, and Hamilton Counties, expressed
appreciation for the work which was done on the CHSTP and stated
that she is looking forward to working with A/GFTC on future
mobility management efforts.
6) Model Highway Design Standards – The CHPLWP and Chazen have
engaged a number of local communities with the goal of having
those communities develop Complete Streets policies. Staff has
decided to supplement that effort by offering professional services
thr ough the on- call contract. Chazen Companies and staff will
review existing municipal street and subdivision standards and
propose revisions to those in accordance with Complete Streets
principles; the cost of this effort is $4500. The first “pilot” of this
will most lik ely be the Town of Warrensburg , since they are already
engaged in related planning efforts . The goal is to develop policy
revisions that are readily adapted by other communities. Kate
noted that there is a companion Complete Streets effort underway
in Wash ington County, and that a similar presentation will be made
in Kingsbury on June 13th.
6. Transit Update: Scott Sopczyk noted that GGFT is gearing up for summer. There
are two new vehicles ordered, which should arrive in early July. There are some
possible operational changes in the works for the fall. GGFT updated their website
to be mobile -phone friendly, and added QR codes to route maps .
A. Amendments and Modifications
1) GGFT facility improvement : Scott Sopczyk reported that the GGFT
building, originally built in 1989, now needs a roof replacemen t. As
such, he is requesting a TIP amendment for a capital project, using
FTA 5307 funds, to enable repairs. The cost estimate from the
architect came in at $6/s.f. This amendment will not require the
movement or transfer of funds from other sources, it simply places
the project on the TIP. Aaron called for a motion to approve the
MOTION – BONAFIDE SECOND – VALENTINE APPROVED
2) NYSDOT Bridge Projects – North Creek and Fort Edward : Aaron
reported that DOT had forwarded two requests to downscope the
Route 28N in North Creek and Route 197 West Branch in Fort
Edward brid ge projects to rehabilitations rather than replacements .
These projects may be somewhat c ontroversial, especially the
Route 197 bridge, given past public opposition to a similar project
on the East Branch. In addition, the Town and Village are working
on Brownfield Opportunity Area planning studies, which
recommend replacement of the Route 197 bridges to allow greater
access. Since there was no representation of affected parties at the
meeting, and given that the requests were received so close to the
meeting, Aaron recommended that the TAC not take up these
issues until the DOT reaches out to the communities. These
amendments will also require Policy C ommittee approval.
B. Project updates
1) Warren County . Ed Doughney reported the following project
updates: i. Beach Road: Kubricky construction won the bid and will
begin construction on the east segment this year, and the
west next year. Scott Sopczyk asked w heth er West Brook
Road will become a two way street; Kevin Hajos said that it
would, as soon as National Grid moves utility poles,
probably by the end of this month.
ii. Hicks Road: The Draft Design Repor t (DDR) was submitted,
and the consultant is currently responding to comments and
addressing SHPO concerns.
iii. Lanfear R oad: This project is an element -specific bridge
project with several components. PS&E has been submitted,
with letting anticipated in the next few months.
iv. Crane Mountain Road: Comments have been received on
the DDR. Public outreach was completed through mailers to
all affected residents. The Final Design Report (FDR) is
anticipated to be complete in 2-4 weeks.
v. Palisades Road: This is anothe r element-specific bridge
project. Recent issues have been identified with one of the
wingwalls. The project is on hold until these issues can be
vi. Make the Connection (2011): County is finalizing
agreements with DOT, and anticipates construction of the
project in summer/fall.
vii. Valley Road: The County has finalized the consultant
agreement with CME.
viii. Blair Road: This is scoped for a replacement, which may
change. The RFP is anticipated to go out this summer.
ix. Middelton Bridge: This project is still in flux, as discussions
with DEC are ongoing.
2) Washington County : Scott Tracy reported on the following projects:
i. County Route 16 over Halfway Brook: Federal authorization
has been received.
ii. County Route 12 over the Mettowee: PS&E is anticipated by
the end of July, with a bid letting in September.
iii. County Route 61 over Battenkill: Right of Way purchase is
anticipated by end of June. Utility work is being scheduled,
with bid letting anticipated at end of August.
iv. Dewey’s Bridge: D esign Approval has been submitted, and
bid letting is slated for the end of September.
v. Karen Hulihan asked about the status of the County Route
21 safety assessment project. Scott noted that he has no
information, as he needs to talk to the Town Supervisor.
3) City of Glens Falls : No report available .
4) Town of Queensbury : Aaron noted that the Town is procuring
design services for the Aviation/Dixon Road intersection.
5) Saratoga County / Moreau / South Glens Falls : Mike Valentine
noted that they are still waiting for updates on the Route 9 safety
6) NYSDOT Frank reported that the Route 29 over Black Creek bridge
is due for letting in June, with anticipated completion date in 2013.
The Route 9/Feeder Dam proj ect is set for a letting date of March
2013, and there may be a public meeting scheduled for this project
next week. Aaron noted that there has been no word from DOT on
the meeting and requested clarification. [Note: the public meeting
has not been schedul ed]. The Route 4 project is in PS&E, with an
October letting. This is the only road reconstruction project in
C. Capital programming issues
1) Project delivery : Frank stated that everyone should have recei ved
a letter from the Region 1 D irector. This specified that the entire
Region 1 program would be carried out on time and within budget.
DOT wants to make sure that everyone understands that going
outside of the schedule/budget which is submitted to DOT is not
acceptable. DOT staff went through the sch edules with all project
sponsors to try to get everything as accurate as possible. Frank
would like to propose that all consultants get project sponsor sign –
off on schedules and project updates before submitting them to
2) Next TIP update : Aaron reported that without federal legislation,
there is no way to know for sure how much funding will be in the
next TIP. It is anticipated that tentative suballocation estimates will
be available by July 1.
8. Other Items
9. Next m eeting and adjourn : Aaron noted that the next meeting will be in the first
or second week in August, and asked for a motion to adjourn.
MOTION: STEVE SWEENEY SECOND: FRANK BONAFIDE MEETING