The text below has been provided to facilitate screen reader technology. For the full report including tables and graphics, please refer to the .pdf version by clicking the icon to the right.
Argyle Pedestrian Improvement Plan
DRAFT August 2024
I. Project Background, History, and Goals
Over the course of the last few years there have been several efforts to identify potential improvements to the pedestrian facilities in and around the Village of Argyle. In particular, two in-depth planning efforts were undertaken; the 2018 Argyle Pedestrian Network Extension Study, which examined potential connections to the Dollar General, and the 2022 Argyle Sidewalk Assessment conducted by the Argyle Improvement Association.
This plan intends to incorporate and build upon these previous efforts by developing concepts, streetscape typologies, and cost estimates for pedestrian amenities in and around the Village.
II. Project Area and Jurisdiction
The study area includes most of the Village of Argyle as well as portions of the surrounding Town. See Figure 1 for study area boundaries. Within the study area, Main Street (NYS 197 & NYS 40) and Sheridan Street (NYS 40) are under the jurisdiction of NYS Department of Transportation (NYSDOT). In terms of County Roads, Washington County has jurisdiction over County Route 47. All other roads within the study area are Village-owned.
A. Maintenance Responsibility
Under NYS Highway Law, the maintenance of sidewalks along State routes is the responsibility of the local municipality. This includes both corrective and preventative maintenance. Although NYSDOT may choose to construct or repair sidewalks, in most cases municipalities elect to undertake sidewalk projects on their own by seeking grant funding. Historically, as long as the facilities meet applicable State design standards, NYSDOT is usually amenable to grant the necessary work permits and may also provide limited technical assistance or project coordination in certain cases.
During the course of “pavement alteration” projects on State highways, NYSDOT is required to make any necessary repairs or upgrades to existing curb ramps which are located along the roadway to bring such facilities into compliance with ADA guidelines. It is anticipated that the next round of pavement preservation undertaken by NYSDOT within the Village (currently slated for the 2024 construction season) will include a number of improvements to curb ramps as well as the introduction of marked crosswalks. These locations have been integrated into the concepts proposed in section IV of this document.
B. Pedestrian Infrastructure Condition
In July 2023, staff from the Lake Champlain-Lake George Regional Planning Board assessed existing pedestrian infrastructure to determine accessibility according to the standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Sidewalks and curb ramps were rated as Not Accessible, Less Accessible, More Accessible, and Fully Accessible according to criteria used by NYSDOT. This data was collected using a GIS smartphone app developed by Warren County GIS staff.
The results of the assessment can be seen in Table 1
Table 1 – ADA Statistics, Sidewalks and Curb Ramps*
1 – Not Accessible: 0.56 miles of sidewalk
1 – Not Accessible: 9 curb ramps
2 – Less Accessible: 0.31 miles of sidewalk
2 – Less Accessible: 8 curb ramps
3 – More Accessible: 1.04 miles of sidewalk
3 – More Accessible: 2 curb ramps
4 – Fully Accessible: 0.02 miles of sidewalk
4 – Fully Accessible: 0 curb ramps
*As of 2023 there were no marked crosswalks in the study area.
C. Roadway Characteristics
The state highways within the study area have varying shoulder widths. In some areas, wide shoulders are used for on-street parking. In certain places, especially near the funeral home, the current roadway striping is insufficient to accommodate demand for on-street parking. Curbing is present in some locations but is inconsistent. Public outreach indicates that drainage is an issue, especially in areas where curbing is insufficient.
County Route 47 is a two-lane marked highway with narrow shoulders. Although vehicles frequently park along the grassy shoulder for events at the American Legion, there is no designated on-street parking. There are no curbs along this roadway.
The Village-owned streets are narrow, unmarked roadways. Curbing is inconsistent, leading to significant drainage issues during storm events. Some residents and visitors park on the grassy area between the sidewalk and road, which can lead to degraded vegetation, rutted turf, and occasional blockages of the pedestrian facilities.
1. AADT and Speed
Traffic volume, as expressed in Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT), is listed in Table 2 below. Traffic counts are conducted by NYSDOT on a periodic basis for all State-owned and federal-aid eligible roadways as well as a sampling of local roads. The % of truck traffic has also been included for reference.
In terms of vehicle speed, data was collected for the Argyle Sidewalk Extension Study in 2018, with additional data collected in 2024 for this study by the consultant team at Creighton Manning, a GAI Company. All locations were within the 30 MPH posted speed limit.
It is worth noting that all speed data collected indicated that the 85th percentile speed (i.e., the speed at which 85% of drivers drive at or below) was above the posted 30 MPH speed limit. Although vehicle speed did not appear to play a significant factor in the crash data as reviewed in Section II.C.2, the consistent trend of vehicle speeds above the posted limit is a factor to be considered for pedestrian crossings and streetscape design.
2. Crash History
Crash statistics for the study area were accessed using NYSDOT’s CLEAR Safety tool. The most recent five years of data (03/31/2018 – 03/31/2023) were pulled to capture pre-pandemic conditions. In this period, 23 accidents occurred. In terms of severity, three involved injuries while the remaining 20 were property damage only. One of the noted injury crashes, located near 37 Sheridan Street, involved serious injury to a pedestrian.
III. Initial Public Input
After discussing multiple formats and options, the project steering committee elected to gather the initial round of public input via a paper survey and mapping exercise. This option was judged to be the most accessible to the community. Copies of the survey were distributed by members of the Argyle Improvement Association (AIA) at the Thistle Day event on Saturday, September 30, 2023. In addition, the survey was made available at the Argyle Free Library and the Post Office. The survey was closed on October 30, 2023.
A. Public Survey Results
Sixty-eight (68) surveys were completed, providing a thorough cross-section of residents and visitors to Argyle. In terms of the survey questions, 56% of respondents indicated that they regularly walk within the Village, while 76% said they would walk more often if the sidewalk conditions improved. The biggest concern regarding walking was safety.
In addition to the survey questions, respondents were invited to share their opinions regarding the locations of potential crosswalks as well as the replacement and/or installation of new sidewalks. The most desired locations for crosswalks included:
* Main Street/Sheridan Street (35 votes)
* Sheridan Street/East Street (25 votes including nearby votes for a crossing at the library)
* Main Street/Barkley Avenue/Post Office (25 votes split between a crossing at Barkley and a crossing at the Post Office)
* School/Firehouse (9 votes)
* Sheridan Street/CR 47 (8 votes)
In terms of the most desired locations for existing sidewalk repair or replacement, the most popular locations were Main Street from Sheridan Street to West Road and Sheridan Street from Main Street to just past East Street. New sidewalks were desired in the following locations:
* NYS 40 from Argyle Central School to Firehouse
* Sheridan Street between East Street and Argyle Central School
* Main Street from Sheridan Street to Dollar General
* East Street
In addition, respondents were given the opportunity to provide additional ideas or concerns. These responses included:
* I can’t use my skateboard
* Lots of people walk to Dollar General. A sidewalk and crosswalk would be awesome!
* Mud on “sidewalk” on s. side of Sheridan is like ice when wet. VERY BAD!!
* Difficult sidewalks make using a stroller impossible
* For exercise we choose to walk in rural areas/roads as opposed to the Village. Argyle Rec Field and the school offers walking for walkers.
* Dogs
* It is difficult to cross to the Post Office.
* Crossing Rt-40/Rt-197 is at the pedestrian’s peril; traffic in the village is too fast and there are no crosswalks.
* Drainage
* There is no safe way to cross the street to Dollar General!
* I would walk more if my street had a sidewalk. It is too dangerous to walk.
* Crosswalks near Stewarts would be very beneficial
* [Regarding the intersection of County Route 47 and State Route 40] Can we square this to a T so people coming off Route 40 are not going 65
* Sidewalks are rough
* Would walk if sidewalk were safer
* Walking our kids & dogs is difficult.
* How about sidewalk with curbs
* Protect the school kids
* I would like to see a crosswalk or two available to Argyle School students and pronounced sidewalks
B. Argyle Improvement Association November 2023 Meeting
The results of the public survey were presented to the AIA during the November 2023 meeting. After discussing the survey and initial delineation of Priority Locations and Streetscape Typologies (see Section IV), a number of additional suggestions were made. In addition, the discussion provided additional context regarding the history of pedestrian-related issues within the village. Specific topics of discussion included:
* Regarding the locally-owned streets, sidewalks were only ever installed on one side of the roadway. This may complicate efforts to install sidewalks along both sides of the street (as opposed to re-establishing sidewalks which once existed).
* Although West Road was not a major focus of the survey results, it should be included within potential streetscape typology areas (see Section IV).
* There is an existing Village access road that links the back of the Highway Department property on Route 40 to the Prospect Hill Cemetery, which is a popular place for locals to walk. This access road could potentially be used to create a loop for pedestrians, in conjunction with other improvements.
* The idea of creating a more direct pedestrian access to the Argyle Recreation Field was discussed. All agreed that improved pedestrian access was needed. Some felt that having additional entries could make it more difficult to keep track of children during large events and that one entryway was sufficient.
* The need for improved storm drainage and/or curbs was discussed, especially in areas where decades of road repaving have raised the elevation of the travel lanes. Ultimately this will require an engineering solution.
* Recent repaving and restriping on NYS 197 near the MB Kilmer Funeral Home has reduced the availability of on-street parking. Although the overall roadway width has not changed, the shoulder on the west side of the roadway has been reduced in width due to the placement of pavement markings. Vehicles still park along the shoulder in this location, but often encroach on the travel lane.
IV. Priority Locations and Streetscape Typologies
Using the results of the public survey and subsequent AIA input, Priority Locations and Streetscape Typology areas have been delineated. These can be seen in Figure 8.
Priority Locations refer to discrete intersections where crosswalks are desired. These concept plans should take into account traffic volume and speed, intersection stopping sight distance, streetscape elements such as trees and benches, pavement markings, lighting, and signage as appropriate. The locations shown in Figure 8 are approximate; see section IV.A for recommended crossing location details. In addition to the five crossing locations listed in Section III.A above, the crossing location at the Dollar General previously identified in the 2018 Argyle Sidewalk Extension Study is to be incorporated by reference.
Streetscape Typologies refer to roadway cross-sections which may include sidewalks, snow storage, curbing, on-street parking (if needed), streetscape elements such as trees and lighting, and travel lanes, as appropriate. The exact boundaries of the typology areas have not been designated; the boundaries in Figure 8 are approximate. The three typologies are:
* Village Core, which features higher-density mixed-use development, high traffic volumes, and on-street parking
* Village Connectors, which have lower-density mixed-use development, high traffic volumes, higher vehicle speeds, and limited on-street parking
* Neighborhood Streets, which feature higher-density residential development, low traffic volume and speed, and may integrate on-street parking or grass snow storage
A. Recommended Improvements
1. Pedestrian Crossing Concepts
Due to the potential for pedestrian/vehicle conflict, crosswalks are a critical component of a safe, comfortable pedestrian network. There are several factors which influence the design and location of pedestrian crossings. These include:
* Visibility. Good crossing locations will allow drivers to see pedestrians waiting to cross the street, to give vehicles enough time to yield properly. Visibility is often a combination of sufficient street lighting and signage as well as infrastructure design that allows for adequate sight distance so that pedestrians are not blocked by parked cars or other features.
* Sidewalk alignment. Many pedestrians seek the most efficient route of travel. As such, crosswalks should be aligned with existing sidewalks wherever possible to reduce the likelihood of pedestrians crossing at unmarked locations.
* Predictability. Through effective signage, drivers should be able to anticipate the potential for pedestrian activity, especially in mid-block locations.
* Crossing distance. Where possible, it is usually desirable to reduce or minimize the length of crosswalks to limit the potential for pedestrian exposure to vehicles. Shorter crossings are also more comfortable for those with mobility challenges. In locations with overly wide travel lanes and/or shoulders, crossing distance can be reduced through curb bump-outs. However, the tradeoff of curb bumpouts is reduced on-street parking and the potential for more complicated snow removal.
The following section of this report contains excerpts of concept plans for the recommended pedestrian crossings. For the full version of the drawings, see Appendix A.
a) Main St./Sheridan St.
The Main Street and Sheridan Street intersection forms the heart of the Village of Argyle. This location carries the most traffic within the Village and also provides access to a convenient store/gas station, restaurant, hardware store, and local bank branch. In addition, there is a vacant lot which is often used as a pull-off for freight truck drivers and area residents for pop-up farm stands.
Currently, this intersection does not feature any crosswalks, despite having sidewalks on all approaches. As such, many pedestrians cross at existing business driveways or wherever they happen to park their car on-street. This makes it difficult for drivers to anticipate predictable locations where pedestrian activity might occur.
The upcoming NYSDOT repaving includes the establishment of painted crosswalks and ADA accessible curb ramps on the east and south approaches to the intersection. In addition, this plan recommends the addition of a crosswalk and associated curb ramps on the north approach, as shown in Figure 9. The concept also includes the establishment of new curbing and sidewalks along the southeast corner of the intersection. This will define the edges of the existing vacant lot, which will improve access management and reduce the potential for pedestrian/vehicle conflicts while also improving the aesthetics of this important community node.
b) Barkley Ave/Town Hall/Main St. (NYS 40)
This section of Main Street is home to the Argyle Town Hall and a US Post Office, while Barkley Avenue provides access to the Argyle Presbyterian Church and the Community Garden. As such, there is a fair amount of pedestrian activity on this section of roadway, which was also noted as a priority area during the public survey. As part of the NYSDOT pavement project, a crosswalk and curb ramps will be added to Barkley Avenue.
Several alternatives for Main Street crossing locations were considered, including the north and south side of Barkley Avenue as well as a mid-block crossing at the Post Office. Ultimately, the north side of Barkley Avenue was selected based on factors such as sight lines, existing driveways, and the alignment with existing sidewalks. See Figure 10.
To improve the visibility of pedestrians, this concept also calls for the establishment of a “no parking” zone for approximately 20’ on either side of the crosswalk. This is a critical safety factor to ensure that parked cars do not block the visibility of pedestrians from drivers on the roadway. As an option to further increase visibility, an RRFB could be considered during detailed design, in coordination with NYSDOT.
c) Sheridan Street/Elm Street/Library
The East Street/Sheridan Street intersection provides access to the Argyle Free Library, an important community resource. The library has no off-street parking lot, making on-street parking a priority. The parking lane on the north side of Sheridan Street is wide and heavily sloped, which increases the crossing distance for pedestrians. In addition, there is no curb ramp; users with mobility challenges or pushing a stroller must use a nearby driveway to get access to the sidewalk. Other factors which influence the location of a crosswalk include existing street lighting on the southwest corner of the intersection, and the alignment of existing sidewalks along the west side of East Street.
To address these issues, the proposed concept plan includes creating a short pedestrian bump-out in front of 25 Sheridan Street with a crosswalk to align with the sidewalk on East Street (see Figure 11). This will result in displacing approximately 2 on-street parking spaces. However, two mitigations are proposed to make up for this impact. First, it is recommended that the on-street parking spaces should be delineated with pavement markings. This will result in more efficient utilization of the space that currently exists. In addition, the existing grassy buffer/maintenance strip to the east of the driveway at 25 Sheridan Street could be removed and replaced with on-street parking. This scenario maintains a meaningful amount of green space in front of the private residence while creating additional parking for the library.
d) Sheridan St./County Route 47
A crossing is proposed on the east leg of the three-way intersection of Sheridan Street and County Route 47, as shown in Figure 12. This location provides access to the proposed sidewalk to connect to the American Legion and Prospect Hill Cemetery. No crosswalk is currently proposed for County Route 47; however, if sidewalks are installed on the south side of Sheridan Street in the future, a crosswalk should be considered at that time.
e) Sheridan St./School/Fire Department
Establishing a connection between the school and Highway Department/Fire Department is a major priority for both residents and stakeholders. These facilities are heavily used by the community for a variety of events. For example, students walk to the Fire Department for field trips; the Fire Department is also the designated evacuation location for the school. In addition, there is a pedestrian connection between the rear of the Highway Department property and the Prospect Hill Cemetery.
GIven the existing sidewalks within the Argyle Central School property as well as sight distances, it is recommended that the crosswalk be located in front of the Highway Department. This would require the construction of an additional sidewalk/sidepath on the north side of the road to connect to the school as well as sidewalks on the south side of the road to connect to the Fire Department. (See Figure 13). As an option to further increase visibility, an RRFB could be considered during detailed design, in coordination with NYSDOT. Although not strictly pedestrian-related, other options to reduce driver speed (and thereby improve pedestrian safety) could include the installation of speed feedback signs and the establishment of a reduced speed school zone.
2. Streetscape Typologies
The elements of roadway design are contingent on a variety of factors including surrounding land use, vehicle speed, stormwater drainage, right-of-way width, and traffic volume. As such, not all streets are built the same.
To capture the character and context of the Village of Argyle, three streetscape typologies were developed. These represent generic idealized snapshots of the road network; for any given location, certain elements may need to be adapted to fit the available right-of-way. The design standards and guidance below were excerpted from NYSDOT Highway Design Manual, the AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, and the NACTO Urban Street Design Guide. The streetscape elements include:
* Travel Lanes. The minimum standard for travel lanes in most situations is 10’; wider lanes may be desirable to accommodate larger vehicles such as freight trucks or agricultural equipment. However, lane width is also correlated strongly with vehicle speed; in general, drivers will go faster as lane widths increase. In a village setting with a 30 mph speed limit, it is therefore recommended to keep lane widths below 12’.
* Parking Lanes/Shoulder. A 4’ shoulder is generally accepted as the minimum width to accommodate cyclists, while the minimum width for a parking lane is 7’. However, larger vehicles such as light-duty trucks may not fit comfortably into the minimum guidelines; 8-9’ shoulders would allow for a wider variety of vehicles to park on-street.
* Curb/Gutter. Curbs are used both to channel stormwater and to provide vertical separation for sidewalks. Gutters or mountable curbs allow for stormwater channelization while also protecting the integrity of the pavement edge somewhat against degradation from vehicle traversal.
* Grass Buffer. Also known as a maintenance strip, this is the linear area between the shoulder and the sidewalk. This buffers pedestrians from traffic, provides a place for utility poles and mail boxes, and allows for snow storage in the winter. This can be occupied by low vegetation/grass or it may be paved with concrete or decorative pavement. To maintain vegetation, a minimum width of 3’ is preferred with an outside range of 2-6’. If space is not available within the right-of-way, the buffer can be eliminated; however in that case it is recommended that 6” curbs be installed to separate the road edge from the sidewalk and sidewalk width should be increased to 6’, preferably 8’, to provide extra separation from the roadway.
* Sidewalks. The ADA minimum standard width in most cases is 5’, although this can be reduced to 4’ in specific circumstances. For areas with higher traffic volume and greater pedestrian activity, it is usually recommended to place sidewalks on both sides of the road.
Not all roads will feature all elements. A description of the streetscape typologies is included below.
a) Village Core
The Village Core represents the heart of the community where the majority of commercial and community events take place. These roadways feature the highest pedestrian and traffic volumes and have right-of-way widths varying from 55’-70’.
Currently, most of this area features ad-hoc on-street parking along the road shoulder. Over many decades, curbs have become degraded in many locations as the state highways have been repeatedly paved over, raising the height of the pavement. In addition, parking incursions have reduced the viability of much of the grass buffer area, to the point where the on-street parking “lane” now abuts the sidewalk.
The proposed roadway section (Alternative 1, see Figure 14) would restore the curb and re-establish a grass buffer between the sidewalk and on-street parking. Even accounting for sidewalk widening to bring the facilities into compliance with ADA standards, this design concept would result in an overall narrowing of the road profile in many locations, essentially allowing for additional space to be used for front yards. As an option where right-of-way does not allow for parking on both sides, Alternative 2 (see also Figure 14) would instead have a shoulder on one side. Although this shoulder is not wide enough to allow for parking, the use of mountable curbs or concrete gutters would accommodate the occasional delivery truck or emergency vehicle to pull on to the grass buffer while still maintaining the integrity of the pavement edge.
b) Village Connectors
The density of commercial and residential land uses in these areas is lower than the core; however, there are still important pedestrian connections to be maintained and enhanced. Currently, there are sidewalks only on one side of the road. On the other side, the road shoulder meets the adjoining land without curbs; stormwater is accommodated via swales or direct absorption.
Two alternatives are proposed, as shown in Figure 15. Alternative 1 calls for sidewalks on both sides, which would maximize pedestrian connectivity. However, given that historically sidewalks were never established on both sides, this would require the support of dozens of property owners to achieve, which could make this a long-term prospect for implementation. Alternative 2 calls for sidewalks on one side, which would still improve pedestrian conditions overall, especially if improved crosswalks are installed as called for elsewhere in this plan.
c) Neighborhood Streets
Elm Street, East Street, West Street, and Barkley Avenue are representative of the traditional residential land uses found in villages throughout the northeast US. Currently, these un-curbed streets feature narrow sidewalks on one side only with 9-10’ travel lanes. Some residents choose to park on-street, pulling the vehicle into the grass buffer between the street and the sidewalk (or on to the lawn, in cases where no sidewalk exists). As a result, the edge of pavement and grass is degraded in many locations. Alternative 1, seen in Figure 16, would replace and improve the existing elements of the roadway. This would include an ADA-compliant 5’ sidewalk as well as a grass buffer with a mountable curb or concrete gutter, which would allow the current occasional on-street parking to continue while maintaining the edge of pavement. Alternative 2 includes sidewalks on both sides of the roadway (see sidebar for additional information).
V. Implementation and Next Steps
A. Cost Estimates
The following cost estimate information was broken down into several categories to enable the Village to prioritize future project phasing. These include:
* Intersection improvements, which encapsulate the pedestrian crossing concepts recommended in this report
* Sidewalk replacement, to bring all existing sidewalks up to ADA standard and establish any other features recommended in the streetscape typologies such as curbing
* New sidewalk construction (high priority), to install new sidewalks in locations which were identified as a higher need from the public survey and mapping exercise
* New sidewalk construction (low priority), to install new sidewalks in locations which were identified as a lower need from the public survey and mapping exercise, but would still provide pedestrian connectivity overall
These have further been broken down into logical segments as seen in Table 4, so that the Village may “mix-and-match” the project into discrete phases as appropriate. It should be noted that these estimates were created with the assumption that federal funding would be utilized, which involves material sourcing guidelines, labor regulations, and project elements such as construction inspection. These factors may not be relevant if construction is undertaken without federal aid. However, in all cases, public pedestrian infrastructure must be designed and built according to the standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act, regardless of the funding source used.
Table 4: Argyle Pedestrian Plan Cost Estimate Summary
Intersection Improvements
Construction Cost
Total Project Cost
Main St./Barkley Ave. Improvements: $53,000 construction/$69,000 total cost
Sheridan St./East St. Improvements: $76,000 construction/$99,000 total cost
Sheridan St./Main St. Improvements: $117,000 construction/$153,000 total cost
Sheridan St./Route 47 Improvements: $35,000 construction/$46,000 total cost
Mid-Block Crossing at School: $61,000 construction/$80,000 total cost
Subtotal – Intersection Improvements: $342,000 construction/$447,000 total cost
Sidewalk Replacements
East Side of Main Street (Sheridan to West): $173,000 construction/$225,000 total cost
West Side of Main Street (Argyle Laundromat to West): $493,000 construction/$641,000 total cost
North Side of Sheridan St (Main to Argyle Central School): $291,000 construction/$379,000 total cost
South Side of Sheridan St (Main to East): $70,000 construction/$91,000 total cost
South Side of Elm St (Main to East): $70,000 construction/$91,000 total cost
South Side of West Rd (Main to 360′ west of intersection): $30,000 construction/$39,000 total cost
North Side of Barkley Ave (Main to Presbyterian Church): $45,000 construction/$59,000 total cost
South of Barkley Ave (320′ south of Barkley along parking lot): $43,000 construction/$56,000 total cost
Subtotal – Sidewalk Replacements: $1,215,000 construction/$1,581,000 total cost
New Sidewalk Construction (High Priority)
East Side of Main St (Sheridan to Dollar General): $181,000 construction/$236,000 total cost
South Side of Sheridan St (East to County RT 47): $94,000 construction/$123,000 total cost
North Side of County RT 47 (Sheridan to Cemetery): $125,000 construction/$163,000 total cost
North Side of Sheridan St (Argyle School to Highway Dept): $45,000 construction/$59,000 total cost
South Side of Sheridan St (Argyle Highway Dept to Fire Dept): $33,000 construction/$43,000 total cost
West side of East St (Elm to Barkley): $87,000 construction/$114,000 total cost
North Side of Barkley Ave (Presbyterian Church to East): $48,000 construction/$63,000 total cost
Subtotal – New Sidewalk Construction (High Priority): $613,000 construction/$801,000 total cost
New Sidewalk Construction (Low Priority)
South Side of Sheridan St (County Rt 47 to Argyle Highway Dept): $319,000 construction/$415,000 total cost
North Side of Elm St (Main to East): $117,000 construction/$153,000 total cost
East Side of East St. (Sheridan to Community Gardens): $257,000 construction/$335,000 total cost
Subtotal – New Sidewalk Construction (Low Priority): $693,000 construction/$903,000 total cost
Grand Total – All Improvements: $2,863,000 construction/$3,732,000 total cost
B. Funding
Although some communities opt to make incremental infrastructure improvements through annual budget expenditures, most municipalities seek grant funding to offset the cost of large-scale capital construction projects all at once. For additional information concerning project phasing options, see section V.C. below.
1. Federally Administered Funding Programs
There are a number of federal grant programs that can be used to design and construct sidewalks and related pedestrian infrastructure. Given that programs are introduced and retired on a regular basis, the most comprehensive and up-to-date list of federal funding programs can be accessed on the FHWA website. This list includes programs which are administered by NYSDOT or A/GFTC (see below for more information) as well as programs which are solicited directly by the Federal Highway Administration. Specific programs of note which are solicited directly through FHWA include Safe Streets 4 All (SS4A) and the Active Transportation Infrastructure Investment Program (ATIIP).
2. State and Locally Administered Funding Programs
A/GFTC Make the Connection: The intent of this program is to improve the non-motorized travel network in the A/GFTC region by addressing gaps or deficiencies that discourage or physically impede efficient and safe bicycle and pedestrian activities. The local match for this program is 20%; in-kind labor is not allowed as a match source. This program is limited to design-only for project sponsors without direct federal-aid experience. The next round of MTC is anticipated to be released in fall 2024 and is administered directly through A/GFTC.
Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP): This program is administered by NYSDOT every other year and allows for the design and construction of a wide variety of bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. Project applicants must compete within their applicable NYSDOT Region, in this case Region 1 which also includes the greater Capital District. The minimum federal share for each project is $500,000; with a 20% match of $125,000, the resulting minimum total project cost is $625,000.
Carbon Reduction Program (CRP): CRP funds may be obligated for projects that support the reduction of transportation emissions, including facilities for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other nonmotorized forms of transportation. In the A/GFTC region, applicants can seek CRP funding two ways: a limited A/GFTC-only allocation which is solicited as part of the overall regional Transportation Improvement Program or co-solicited with the TAP program through NYSDOT every other year. For the combined NYSDOT TAP/CRP solicitation, the TAP project minimums apply. As this is a relatively new program, it is recommended that potential applicants seek guidance from A/GFTC and NYSDOT Region 1 prior to seeking funding.
C. Project Phasing/Partnerships
To undertake a project of this magnitude, it may be desirable to phase the project or to seek opportunities to bundle the sidewalk construction with other projects, or to work with partners to reduce the overall burden on the Village. Some options include:
* Bundle with sewer/water upgrades. The Village is already exploring a variety of options for water and sewer infrastructure. In some cases, these projects would require digging up some of the existing sidewalks anyway, which could provide a logical opportunity to replace them with better pedestrian facilities. There may also be ways to use multiple funding sources to reduce local match requirements for grants.
* Phase design first. One option would be to pursue design for sidewalk and pedestrian improvements as a stand-alone project. This could be self-funded or grants such as MTC could be used. The benefit of this approach is that having a completed design and accurate cost estimates is a valuable metric for certain funding applications such as TAP, since many of the potential unknowns of construction have already been identified.
* Phase high priority locations first. Another option would be to seek funding for the highest priority locations, while leaving lower priority areas for the future. This would reduce the short-term financial impact to the Village. However, given recent historical inflation trends, it is likely that the cost of sidewalk construction even a few years in the future will be more expensive. In addition, this approach creates multiple seasons of construction, which could be frustrating for residents and business owners.
* Incremental improvements. Like many municipalities in New York, the Village already has a policy which allows for cost-sharing with residents and property owners for sidewalk improvements at individual parcels. Although in theory this should result in the incremental improvement of sidewalks, in practice very few property owners actually utilize this program. In addition, it is likely that there will be at least a few property owners who are unwilling to participate, leading to inconsistent sidewalk conditions. If those locations were then improved at the Village’s expense in the future, this could lead to frustration and resentment of any property owners who did contribute to improvements in good faith. The other drawback to this approach is that the repeated mobilization of contractors for short segments of sidewalk construction can be more expensive on a unit basis than undertaking longer sections at the same time.
A related concept would be to form a sidewalk district which would collect a nominal fee from property owners on an annual basis, which could then be used to fund future sidewalk improvements. This option would likely take several years to result in enough funding to make meaningful improvements, but it would eliminate the potential inconsistency inherent in the current local law.
* Explore local fundraising options. The Village of Argyle is an active, engaged community. Groups such as the Argyle Improvement Association and the local American Legion could potentially lead a large-scale fundraising effort dedicated to sidewalk improvements. Although it is unlikely that this would result in enough funding to completely offset a match for construction, it may be feasible to use this funding as a match for a design-only project or for a smaller-scale construction effort.
* Consider partnerships with Town and/or County. Although the main focus of this plan is on Village infrastructure, there are concepts which would require the involvement of the Town of Argyle and Washington County to bring to fruition. A multi-jurisdictional approach could not only reduce the administrative and/or financial burden on the Village but would also result in a more competitive application for funding.
D. Maintenance
Maintenance of pedestrian infrastructure is a key concern for any municipality. For the purposes of this plan, “maintenance” includes short-term upkeep, such as removing leaves, snow, and debris, as well as long-term preservation of pavement, drainage, and general infrastructure condition to ensure ADA accessibility. This section is intended to provide a general overview of issues related to pedestrian infrastructure maintenance.
1. Short-term maintenance
In New York State, many municipalities have enacted local laws which delegate the removal of snow, leaves, and/or other debris to the adjoining landowner; Argyle sets forth these provisions in Local Law 1 of 2007. However, some landowners may not be physically capable, available, and/or willing to engage in timely snow removal. Argyle’s regulation levies a fine in the case of noncompliance within a set time period, in this case 48 hours after a snowfall. Although this may be effective in some cases, not all municipalities have the capacity to enforce these types of violations. Another option would be to purchase dedicated snow-removal equipment and have municipal employees undertake the snow removal throughout the Village as needed. Although this will increase overall accessibility in the Village, it is also more expensive.
2. Long-term maintenance
Regarding long-term maintenance, Argyle’s sidewalk regulations state that “The owner of premises abutting on any street
or road who owns the property where a sidewalk has been laid shall repair, maintain, replace and reconstruct such sidewalk.” However, no guidance is included regarding standards for maintenance and repair and there are no references to the ADA. This could create some confusion as there is no clear threshold established for when repair and replacement should take place. In addition, as stated above, many property owners choose not to repair or replace their sidewalks, even though the Village of Argyle currently has a policy which enables cost-sharing to offset the expense.
These types of local laws, although very common in NYS, can lead to legal confusion with regards to property owner liability for injury related to poor pavement condition (i.e. trip-and-fall lawsuits) versus municipal requirements to maintain ADA accessibility under federal law. In general, although these types of local laws may lead to some incremental advances, they do not ensure consistent sidewalk maintenance in the long term. The most effective way to ensure that accessible, safe sidewalks are available is for the Village to undertake the design, construction, and long-term maintenance of the pedestrian infrastructure network.
Ultimately, the ADA states that municipalities are responsible for general upkeep of sidewalks to ensure they remain open and usable to persons with disabilities. However, in practice this may require a more nuanced interpretation of local, state, and federal regulations. Therefore, it is recommended that a land use attorney be consulted prior to enacting any local laws or policy. For a more in-depth overview, please refer to “Land Use Law and Sidewalk Requirements Under the Americans with Disabilities Act” published by the Real Property, Trust and Estate Law Journal, available here: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3019506