Old Fort Edward Junction Locks Trail Extension Feasibility Study

The following text has been extracted from the report to facilitate screen reader technology. For the full report including graphics and appendices, please refer to the .pdf file.

 

FINAL Feasibility Report
Old Fort Edward Junction Locks Trail Extension
Prepared for:
Adirondack |Glens Falls Transportation Council
11 South Street, Suite 203 Glens Falls, New York 12801
And
Village of Fort Edward
118 Broadway Fort Edward, NY 12828
Revision 2 November 2023

Prepared by Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C. 10 Airline Drive, Suite 200 Albany, New York 12205

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report examines the feasibility of providing on-road and off-road bicycle and pedestrian accommodations between the Empire State Trail (EST) at the intersection of NYS Route 4 and Argyle Street and existing on-road bicycle and pedestrian facilities on Canal Street. Two different off-road alignments are being considered, one along the former canal alignment between the junction lock walls and the other along the former towpath just to the east of the canal junction locks. This report also assesses potential bridge crossing options over Bond Creek, and the necessary improvements to provide the continuous bicycle and pedestrian accommodations along Argyle Street and Canal Street, to connect the EST to this portion of the off-road trail.
Improvements to the southern connection to the EST consist of a new shared-use path along the north side of Argyle Street, new pedestrian crossing of Broadway at the intersection with Argyle Street, ADA accommodations, signage, pavement markings, and an improved parking area.
The two off-road alternatives will provide a 10 ft. wide crushed stone shared use path that follows within, or adjacent to the former canal junction lock structure. This project segment includes crossing Bond Creek with a new prefabricated bridge or the rehabilitation of the existing stone arch bridge that is on the original tow path alignment.
The northern connection to the EST consists of formalizing Canal Street as a Walk/Bike Roadway by installing Share the Road signage and the EST sign assembly.
The total costs for Construction, Engineering, and Construction Inspection for each project segment are shown below:
. Southern EST Connection on Argyle Street = $216,000

. Off-road Alignment Alternative 1 = $628,000

. Off-road Alignment Alternative 2 = $717,000

. Northern EST Connection on Canal Street = $6,000

1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Old Fort Edward Junction Lock, located northwest of the intersection of US Route 4 and Argyle Street, formerly connected the modern Champlain Canal to the Glens Falls Feeder Canal. The lock was abandoned in the 1940 s and today, the concrete walls, steel components, and former towpath remain in place. The A/GFTC has retained Barton & Loguidice, DPC, (B&L) to examine the existing conditions of the Village of Fort Edward owned corridor from Argyle Street to Canal Street (including the former canal junction lock) and recommend improvements to transform this corridor into an off-road multi-use path. This report will also investigate existing conditions and required improvements associated with connecting the off-road corridor to the current route of the EST at both the southern end along Argyle Street, and along the northern end on Canal Street.

2.0 INVENTORY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
A site visit was conducted on May 25, 2023 to inventory the existing project area conditions. The inventory included signing, striping, roadway widths, existing structures, and any noteworthy features or conditions. The existing conditions of the potential multi-use path routes are described below as well as displayed on the existing conditions map in Appendix A.
2.1. Southern Connection along Argyle Street
The southern connection for the trail will extend from the existing EST on Broadway (US Route
4) east along Argyle Street (NYS Route 197) to the existing gravel parking area (approximately 175 ft.). At the intersection of Broadway and Argyle Street there is one crosswalk present to cross Argyle Street. There are no crosswalks or curb ramps installed to cross Broadway at this intersection. Sidewalks are present and in fair condition along both sides of Broadway, and on the south side of Argyle Street. There are no pedestrian, bicycle, or crossing signage present within the vicinity of the intersection.
Table 2.1 (below) contains traffic data for both Broadway and Argyle Street that was obtained from the NYSDOT Traffic Data Viewer.
Table 2-1: Roadway Data
Roadway Broadway (US Route 4) Argyle Street (NYS Route 197)
Functional Classification Principal Arterial Minor Arterial
National Highway System Yes No
AADT 7,555 3,147
Percent Trucks 7% 8%
Posted Speed Limit 30mph 30mph
85th Percentile Speed 34mph –

Broadway is curbed on both sides and currently has a centerline double-yellow pavement stripe with no edge lines. The pavement width is 27 ft. with 13.5 ft. between the curb and the centerline which constitutes a wide-curb lane according to the NYSDOT Highway Design Manual Chapter 2 to accommodate vehicles and bicyclists.

Argyle Street consists of two 11 ft. travel lanes in both directions delineated by white edge lines and a center double-yellow line with a 4-ft. shoulder on the north side and a 1-ft. shoulder on the south. Both sides of the roadway are curbed, and the Right-of-Way width is approximately 56 ft., with approximately 25 ft. of available ROW on the north side of roadway between the curb and the ROW boundary.

2.2. Off-Road Route The off-road segment of the proposed project utilizes the alignment of the former junction lock to connect Argyle Street to Canal Street. This connection consists of two different alternatives, one that utilizes the area between the lock walls, and one that uses the former towpath alignment. The off-road connection will also cross Bond Creek with a new prefabricated bridge or rehabilitation of the existing stone arch bridge that is on the tow path alignment.
2.2.1. Alternative 1 Within the Lock Structure The existing junction lock walls are 19 ft. wide on the southern portion of the structure, then widen to 42-50 ft. on the northern portion where the structure intersects with Bond Creek. The wide section of the lock structure has a concrete slab base that is relatively level. The concrete walls are approximately 8 ft. tall and in good condition. Some of the steel hardware, such as tie-off straps and valve doors, are still intact. See photos below.

Construction debris has been disposed of within the structure walls over the years, such as granite curb pieces, bluestone sidewalk slabs, various other rubble, and plastic sewer pipes. There are also other lock infrastructure remains at the intersection with Bond Creek, such as block retaining walls, a stone arch bridge that carries the towpath on the east side, and another bridge like structure on the west. The northern bank of Bond Creek is contained by a block retaining wall and the southern bank appears to also be contained by a retaining wall as well, but this wall has since collapsed into the creek. There is minor vegetation growth within this area as it appears that it is regularly mowed and maintained. North of the Creek, heavy vegetation overgrowth has enveloped the area between the lock walls, which appear to be mostly intact. The lock structure ends at the southern terminus of Canal Street, adjacent to the Mills Apartments.
2.2.2. Alternative 2 Along the Existing Towpath The towpath on the east side of the lock structure is directly adjacent to the lock wall and can be accessed from the parking area off Argyle Street via a path just east of the structure. The path rapidly climbs 8 ft. in elevation to become level with the top of the lock walls. The path begins on a narrow plateau that is 8 ft. in width from the concrete wall to the top of bank and is heavily overgrown. The width of the plateau gradually increases in width to approximately 14 ft. Continuing north, the path then crosses Bond Creek over the existing stone arch structure. The path then continues in similar conditions to the southern terminus of Canal Street. See photos below for representative photos of the existing towpath.

An existing stone arch bridge carries the towpath over Bond Creek approximately 400 ft. to the North of the Argyle Street entrance. Record documents indicate that this bridge was built in 1830 as part of the Champlain Canal and the lock/gate system. The existing bridge consists of a dry-stacked stone arch with stone abutments, wingwalls and spandrel walls. The stone wingwalls tie-in to the existing stone/concrete walls along the creek and the remains of the canal structure.
A full structural assessment of the stone arch bridge was completed by the Village in May 2022 and can be found in Appendix C. Overall, the arch bridge is in poor condition with several areas of the stone structure that have partially failed. The stone abutment at the southwest corner of the bridge has partially failed with areas of voids, shifted and cracked stones. This condition at the abutment is resulting in loss of compression continuity in the arch stones as evidence by displaced and missing stones along the east and west fascia and spandrel walls. There are also several areas of the wingwalls that have missing stones and voids and the walls are displaced or bulging toward the creek. The structural assessment indicates that while the bridge appears to be stable at this time, the degradation will continue over time and could result in partial or complete failure of the bridge making it unsafe for public access in its current condition .

2.3. Northern Connection along Canal Street Canal Street is a dead-end local Village roadway with approximately 12 ft. of available pavement width. There are currently no sidewalks or curbing. The roadway provides access to five residences and has a ROW width of approximately 60 ft. There is approximately 42 ft. of ROW width between the western edge of pavement and the ROW boundary. Existing traffic volumes are not available on the NYSDOT Traffic Data Viewer but is assumed to be a very low volume road only providing access to the five residences.

 

3.0 CONCEPT ALTERNATIVES
3.1. Standards
The proposed design layouts and recommendations are based on the following standards:
. AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities 4th ed., 2012,

. NYSDOT Highway Design Manual (HDM),

. AASHTO Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets 7th ed., 2018,

. FHWA Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), 2009,

. NYS Supplement to the MUTCD,

. NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide, and

. EST Design Guide, October 2017

. AASHTO LRFD Guide Specifications for the Design of Pedestrian Bridges

 

3.2. Southern Connection along Argyle Street
To connect the southern entrance of the off-road trail to the EST along Broadway, installing an asphalt paved or concrete 10 ft. wide multi-use path on the north side of Argyle Street is proposed. The 175 ft. long path will start in the northeast quadrant of the intersection and extend along Argyle Street where it would meet the existing gravel parking area. From this point the alignment would turn north and become the off-road Junction Locks trail. A durable, impervious surface adjacent to Argyle Street, such as asphalt or concrete, is recommended for use within the NYSDOT ROW to reduce maintenance costs and increase service life. A buffer of 2-4 ft. between the existing curb and the path should be used to provide snow storage and a buffer between the active roadway for pedestrians and cyclists.
The multi-use path on the north side of the roadway can be constructed within the available 25 ft. of ROW and will provide simple access for both pedestrians utilizing the sidewalks and bicyclists utilizing the shared lanes along Broadway. However, consideration should be given to the property adjacent to this proposed portion of the trail. The property is a rental property that has the potential for several cars to park in the adjacent driveway. Potential options to reduce the impacts to the adjacent property on the north side of Argyle Street could include a reduction in the shoulder width on the north side of Argyle Street to 1-ft. to match the southern side. The NYSDOT HDM states that the minimum allowable shoulder width on curbed Urban Arterials with no accommodations for bicyclists may be 0-ft. Additional mitigation measures include installing vegetation screening between the new path and the building, or fencing to shield the view between path users and the residents. If this option is pursued for construction, the design team should consult with the Village and the property owner to make sure that the proposed plan is conveyed and what changes will be made.
Another alternative measure that was reviewed was utilizing the existing 4-ft.-wide shoulder on the north side of Argyle Street as a narrow bike lane, however, the NYSDOT HDM recommends the use of a 5 ft. shoulder for bicyclists on Urban Arterials, requiring the curb to be reset 1-ft. behind its current location. Additionally, the southern side of the roadway only has a 1-ft.
shoulder, the ROW required to widen the shoulder to 5 ft. is limited, and this alignment would require an additional road crossing on Argyle Street to be installed at the entrance to the off-road trail alignment.

The concept shown in figure 3-1 includes a formalized gravel parking area with a new driveway shifted east on Argyle Street to provide direct route for the shared-use path to transition from Argyle Street to the off-road alignment. The minimum available ROW within the Village owned parcel is 85 ft., providing an opportunity to increase the area for vehicle parking.
A crosswalk across Broadway on the north side of the intersection with Argyle Street is proposed to line up the pedestrian circulation route on the west side of Broadway with access to the off-road portion of the trail connection on the north side of Argyle Street. The crossing provides the shortest direct route across Broadway to the Argyle Street path and is placed in the typical location at the intersection where drivers would expect to see a crosswalk. The crosswalk could be moved away from the intersection creating a mid-block crossing on Broadway, although this will require additional path construction to connect from the crossing location to Argyle Street as well as creating a layout that will allow an Argyle Street westbound right turning vehicle to now accelerate northbound before approaching the crosswalk. The crosswalk at the intersection where the right turning vehicle is at a stop is preferred.
This crossing location has an available stopping sight distance for vehicles traveling southbound on Broadway of 300 ft., and 600 ft. for vehicles traveling northbound which are both greater than the NYSDOT HDM Chapter 2 minimum Stopping Sight Distance of 250 ft. This value was determined using a design speed of 35 mph, which is slightly higher than the measured 85th percentile speed of 34mph in the vicinity of the project area.
For the proposed crossing of Broadway, the EST Guide lists a marked and signed crosswalk and Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB) as the desired treatment. Several additional treatments could also be used based on engineering judgement. As a minimum treatment, ADA compliant features such as curb ramps and detectable warning units should be installed at the crossing and advanced pedestrian crossing signage and pavement markings should be installed on Broadway in accordance with Figure 3-2. The warning signs should be fluorescent yellow-green and should include the retroreflective signpost strip and the crosswalk should be NYSDOT Type LS that includes parallel stripes and ladder bars to enhance visibility.

Source: NYSDOT TSMI 17-07 PSAP Countermeasure Details, Drawing UC-2, Detail 3
Additional signage that should be installed at this crosswalk location include an R10-15 ( Turning Vehicles Yield to Pedestrians ) sign which reminds vehicles that are turning right from Argyle Street to yield the Right of Way to pedestrians in the crosswalk. Another sign that should be installed on the multi-use path at the
crosswalk is an R9-6 sign which reminds cyclists that
Source: 2009 MUTCD
pedestrians have the right of way within a crosswalk and on the multi-use path, or to remind cyclists that may be
on Broadway that they need to yield to pedestrians within the crosswalk.
3.3. Off Road Multi-Use Path
The off-road segment of the path will utilize the alignment of the former junction lock to connect Argyle Street to Canal Street. This connection consists of two different alternatives, one that utilizes the area between the lock walls, and one that uses the former towpath alignment. The connection will also need to cross Bond Creek.
3.3.1. Alternative 1 Within the Lock Structure This alternative would direct the path from Argyle Street between the existing concrete lock walls and continue north to Canal Street. The existing walls are in good shape and would provide for a unique experience as pedestrians and cyclists travel through the former canal. There is minimal vegetation growth between Argyle Street and Bond Creek. The construction debris that was disposed of here would need to be removed.
The major constraint to this alternative is the crossing of Bond Creek. There is currently no bridge in this location and no obvious alternative to cross the creek using the existing infrastructure. A pre-fabricated steel or concrete pedestrian bridge could be installed at this location to carry the trail over the Bond Creek. The prefabricated bridge would have a span length of approximately 30 ft. to cross the natural banks of Bond Creek. The steel or concrete bridge superstructure would be supported on concrete footings and abutments. The bridge would carry a width of 10 ft. to match the trail on the approaches and would include pedestrian railing along both sides.

Another constraint to this alternative is the northern section of this alignment is heavily vegetated and will require a significant amount of clearing and grubbing in order to construct the trail. There is also a section of the canal walls that the trail will also need to rise above as it approaches Canal Street. Otherwise, this alternative should be relatively straightforward to construct and could provide a unique walk-through history.
3.3.2. Alternative 2 Along existing Towpath This alternative includes the construction of a 10-ft. wide dedicated off-road multi-use path along the alignment of the former towpath adjacent to the eastern wall of the canal. This alignment would utilize the existing arch bridge to cross Bond Creek once repairs are performed. However, this alternative has several restrictions that need to be addressed in order to transform this into a useable trail meeting EST guidelines. These items to be addressed are:
.
8-ft. climb in elevation at the southern end of the canal structure to reach the tow path plateau on top. To be ADA compliant, the slope of the path must be 5% or less in grade, which would require at least a 160-ft. long ramp (nearly half of the length of the lock structure) and would require a significant amount of earthwork to meet this grade. Additional pedestrian railing would also be required adjacent to steep slopes or drop-offs.

.
Significant amount of clearing and grubbing to widen the existing path to meet EST guidelines

.
Railing would need to be installed on the top of the canal wall, and on the eastern side of the towpath to prevent users from falling down the steep slopes.

.
The existing Stone Arch structure needs significant rehabilitation efforts to be improved for public use. It is noted that these repairs are short-term (10 15 year service life) structural repairs and do not consider historic restoration or historic preservation of the structure (if that is requested by the State Historic Preservation Office):

o
Remove stones and debris from the waterway

o
Clear trees adjacent to bridge to alleviate additional tree root damage to structure

o
Re-point joints and cracks in masonry substructures

o
Replace and grout missing stones along arch, spandrel walls and substructures

o
Grout voids in the southeast abutment along the creek

 

.
The Arch structure is 11 ft. wide and will require railings to be installed along both sides.

.
A review and determination of historical significance of the remaining canal structure should be obtained from the New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) prior to pursuing this option. Any alterations to the existing structure are subject to their review which may require additional consultation and/or historically accurate construction materials and techniques.

3.4. Northern Connection along Canal Street As discussed in section 2.4, Canal Street is a low volume dead-end local roadway that provides access to five residences. In accordance with the EST Guidelines, Canal Street is classified as a Walk/Bike Roadway which is a very low volume road (fewer than 400 vehicles per day) that is designed to serve pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles all within the asphalt roadway area. Due to the low volumes and narrow widths, centerlines should not be marked. Regular pull-off areas to allow for passing event should be provided and is accomplished on Canal Street by the existing driveways and the gravel parking area near Notre Dame Street. Canal Street is recommended to be signed with Share the Road signs as well as the EST assembly.
3.5. Environmental / Permitting Requirements Preliminary investigations into Environmental and Cultural Resources and potential impacts and recommendations are included in the following discussion, along with the anticipated permitting needs. Additional detailed environmental investigations will be required during the Engineering phase, depending on the type of funding that is secured.
3.5.1. Surface Waters Review of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) Environmental Resource Mapper (ERM) indicated that Bond Creek is a mapped NYSDEC Class C Stream with C Standards, is identified as resource PWL:1101-0085, and is a tributary of the Upper Hudson River. The ERM also indicated that the creek is listed as a 303(d) stream due to nutrient loading and low dissolved oxygen. The banks of this surface water could be impacted by bridge installation or rehabilitation operations and would require review by the NYSDEC. There are no mapped NYS wetlands located within or adjacent to the project area.
The National Wetland Inventory (NWI) mapping was reviewed to determine whether any wetland polygons are depicted within the project limits. Multiple NWI polygons were identified, especially to the northwest of the existing towpath, and will need to be field confirmed during the design phase. See Appendix D for wetland polygon mapping and additional information regarding Bond Creek.
3.5.2. Flood Zone The 100- or 500-year flood zone of Bond Creek does not encroach into the project area within the on-road portions of the project, or the off-road portions along the former canal junction locks, according to the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map. See Appendix D for the Flood map.

3.5.3. Historical Resources A review of the New York State s Office of Historic Preservation s (SHPO) Cultural Resource Information System (CRIS) was completed. The review indicated that the corridor is not located within an historical district, and there are no recorded National Register (NR) Listed, Eligible buildings, or structures within or substantially contiguous to the proposed improvements. However, since the canal walls and arch bridge are over 50 years old, there is the potential for those structures to be historically significant and should be reviewed by SHPO for inclusion on the NR. There are also four buildings located on US Route 4 and Argyle Street that have an Undetermined Status according to the CRIS system. Coordination with SHPO should be progressed once the SEQR process begins and a Lead Agency for the project has been established or coordination with a permitting agency requiring SHPO coordination such as NYSDEC or USACE has begun.
3.5.4. SEQRA/NEPA Review If Federal funding is obtained for the project, a review under the National Environmental Policy Act is required. The project will likely be categorized as a Categorical Exclusion. If State funding or a permit is required from a State Agency, then a review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act is required. The project will likely be categorized as an Unlisted Action and the Village of Fort Edward will be able to issue a Negative Declaration as the Lead Agency.
3.5.5. Anticipated Permits -NYSDOT Highway Work Permit for work associated with the southern connection -Blanket Section 401 Water Quality Certification (NYSDEC)1 -Nationwide Permit 14 from the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)2 -Section 404 Clean Water Act (USACE)2
1Required if work occurs within the banks of Bond Creek. 2Required if Federal wetlands are present and disturbed by the project.
3.6. Wayfinding Signage The Village s goal for this trail is to shift the existing alignment of the EST along Broadway and Notre Dame Street to this primarily off-road trail. All proposed wayfinding signage should be consistent with the EST Guidelines and will consist of the EST confirming/reassurance assembly that should be placed just beyond intersections or locations where a turn has been made. Also, the Route Sign Assembly with Auxiliary

3.7. Surface Course It is anticipated that the surface course on the Village owned off-road segment will be crushed stone. Areas expected to be encroached upon by motor vehicles, or adjacent to existing roadways, should consider utilizing asphalt or concrete pavement.
Crushed stone aggregate surface course that is bound by clay particles has proven to be successful in demanding environments and the natural materials of this surface course appeals to the environmental setting of this project. Examples of this durable stone course system use includes NYS OPRHP Minnewaska State Park, the Rockefeller State Park Preserve, and the Ashokan Rail Trail in Ulster County.

Old Fort Edward Junction Locks Trail Extension Final Feasibility Report
4.0 COST ESTIMATES
Preliminary cost estimates were prepared for the three project area segments, including the two alternatives for the off-road trail alignment. The cost estimates were prepared with the assumption that the project would receive funding through a federal or state grant and constructed through the traditional design-bid-build process. Federal or state grant programs typically provide funding to cover 50% to 80% of the total project costs. The total costs for Construction, Engineering, and Construction Inspection for each project segment are shown below:
. Southern EST Connection on Argyle Street = $216,000

. Off-road Alignment Alternative 1 = $628,000

. Off-road Alignment Alternative 2 = $717,000

. Northern EST Connection on Canal Street = $6,000

 

5.0 FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES
There are several potential funding opportunities that are available for pedestrian and bicyclist improvement and trail connection projects. The Village should be aware that all of the funding sources are reimbursement programs that will require the Village to expend the initial project costs and then receive reimbursements from the funding source. Most of the programs also require the local municipality to provide a portion of the total grant amount, which varies by program.
NYSDOT Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) is available for projects that improve the quality of life of the community through the construction of pedestrian and bicycle facilities and pedestrian safety improvements. The program is a Set-Aside of funds from the Surface Transportation Block Grant Program. The FHWA has set aside a minimum of $1.4 Billion annually for this program through 2026.
.
The current round is open with applications due January 9, 2024

.
20% Local Match

.
Federal Aid Procedures Apply

.
Design & Construction: Minimum = $500,000; Maximum = $5 Million

Canalway Grant Program awards up to $1 Million dollars annually for Canal related capital projects. Projects must be located along one of the four canals of the NYS Canal System, trail linkages, connections to existing trail segments, or along the historic canal alignment. In addition, the program supports projects that help to enhance or tie into the EST Initiative and/or provide connectivity to the EST. This program can be applied for through the NYS Consolidated Funding Application (CFA) in 2024.
.
50% Local Match

.
Grant awards range from $25,000 to $150,000

A/GFTC Make the Connection Program is available to assist municipalities with funding to improve the region s non-motorized travel network. Project types that are considered in the program include new sidewalk and trail connections, pedestrian safety improvements, and pavement marking improvements. Make the Connection funding is available through the FHWA and administered by the A/GFTC.
.
20% Local Match

.
Design Only Projects have a minimum of $25,000

.
Design & Construction or Construction Only Projects have a minimum of $75,000

.
Federal Aid Procedures Apply

NYSOPRHP Recreational Trails Program (RTP) provides funding for the development and maintenance of recreational trails or trail-related facilities. RTP funding is available through the FHWA and administered by the NYSOPRHP. RTP can be applied for through the NYS CFA in 2024
.
20% Local Match

.
Federal Aid Procedures Apply

.
Design & Construction: Minimum = $25,000; Maximum = $250,000

.
$1.9 Million available during the 2023 CFA application period

NYSOPRHP Environmental Protection Fund (EPF) provides funding for the development and planning of parks and recreational facilities open to the public to preserve these lands for recreation, or conservation purposes. EPF projects can be applied for through the NYS CFA in 2024.
.
Grant will fund up to 50% of total project cost

.
Design & Construction: Minimum = $25,000; Maximum = $500,000

.
$26.0 Million available during the 2023 CFA application period

Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Grant is a federal grant program initiated by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law provides for $5 billion in grants over 5 years. The second round of funding is open now through July 10, 2023 and provides funding to support planning and operational initiatives for all roadway users including pedestrians and bicyclists. The Federal DOT has set the minimum award amount at $2.5 million for the FY 2023 period. However, they state that they reserve the right to modify the minimum and maximum amounts based on the available pool of applications.
.
20% local match

.
Federal aid procedures apply

.
Applications in previous years were due in July

.
The project will need to be combined with other similar initiatives to meet the minimum award amount

Northern Border Regional Commission (NBRC), Catalyst Program is designed to stimulate economic growth and inspire partnerships that improve rural economic vitality across the NBRC region that includes public infrastructure and outdoor recreation projects. The 2023 application process has already passed so the spring 2024 program should be targeted.
.
100% Federal Funds (0% Local Match)

.
Federal Aid Procedures Apply

.
$45 Million was available during the 2023 application period

 

 

White Creek Pedestrian and Parking Study

The following text has been extracted from the report to facilitate screen reader technology. For the full report including graphics and appendices, please refer to the .pdf file.

Final Feasibility Report
White Creek Pedestrian and Parking Study
Prepared for:
Adirondack |Glens Falls Transportation Council
11 South Street, Suite 203 Glens Falls, New York 12801
And
Town of White Creek
28 Mountain View Drive Cambridge NY 12816
Revision 2 September 2023
White Creek Pedestrian and Parking Study
FINAL
September 2023
Prepared by Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C. 10 Airline Drive, Suite 200 Albany, New York 12205

1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Town of White Creek has identified several pedestrian improvements and parking needs to be addressed near the Cambridge Community Forest (CCF) and Town Hall area including Rockside Drive and Mountain View Drive. The need for this study has developed from the expansion and increased popularity of the CCF. Currently the CCF leases a small parking lot area near Rockside Drive and Old Route 313 intersection that is approximately 1,000 ft. away from the CCF entrance. Users of the CCF will frequently park along Rockside Drive to be closer to the entrance or because they are unaware of the leased parking lot. Rockside Drive is a narrow two-way local residential roadway that does not include provisions for on-street parking. Parked cars will often block the traveled way of the roadway or encroach on the resident s lawns. This study also includes parking improvements to the nearby Town Hall with the intent to provide additional parking capacity for both the CCF and the nearby Cambridge Central School, and to improve pedestrian mobility from the Town Hall to the Nearby State Route 22. Additionally, the Town intends to install Electric Vehicle (EV) charging stations at or around the Town Hall. EV charging stations for public or commercial use are categorized as Level 2 or Direct Current Fast Charging (DCFC or Level 3) equipment. Level 2 stations will charge a Batter Electric Vehicle (BEV) in 4 10 hours and a Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV) in 1 2 hours. The Level 3 equipment will charge the BEV in an hour and is not compatible with most PHEV s. For the purposes of this study, level 2 EV charging stations are assumed to be the most compatible with the needs of the Town of White Creek.
The study will examine the existing conditions of the project area including the Town Hall parking lot, the CCF parking area, Rockside Drive, and Mountain View Drive. This report will assess potential mitigation options to address the parking concerns as well as provide conceptual designs of the revised parking plan at the Town Hall.

2.0 INVENTORY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
A site visit was conducted on April 10, 2023 to inventory the existing project area conditions. The inventory included signing, striping, roadway widths, existing structures, and any noteworthy features or conditions. The existing conditions of the roadways are described below as well as displayed on the existing conditions map in Appendix A. The existing roadways included as part of this study, Rockside Drive, Brookside Drive, and Mountain View Drive, are all owned and maintained by the Village of Cambridge.
2.1. Cambridge Community Forest Parking Assessment
The trailhead and entrance to the CCF is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Rockside Drive and Brookside Drive. Currently, parking is not accommodated within the vicinity of the trailhead to the CCF. The flat berm at the trailhead entrance to the CCF that connects Rockside & Brookside Drive to the bridge over the White Creek is approximately 24 feet wide, which is not wide enough to support parking in any configuration at this location. Additionally, the available pavement width of both Rockside and Brookside Drive ranges from 19-20 feet, which is the minimum recommended by the NYSDOT Highway Design Manual for two-way travel on local residential roadways.

A small area for parking has been leased by the CCF located approximately 1,000 feet west of the trailhead on Rockside Drive. The parking lot is a grass and gravel surfaced area delineated by wooden logs and signage directing CCF users to park in this area. The area measures approximately 55 feet in length by 40 feet in width. The parking area can accommodate approximately 6-8 cars in its current configuration. However, without clear parking delineation, the lot is percieved to hold less vehicles as users tend to park their vehicles further apart when parking stall delineation is not provided.

2.2. Town Hall Parking Lot The existing parking facility surrounding the White Creek Town Hall consists of a gravel surface with two separate parking areas, one directly in front of the entrance to the town hall and a larger area to the side of the Town Hall building. The front area measures approximately 72 x 33 and the larger parking area on the east side measures 65 x 125 . There are two reserved parking spaces in front of the Town Hall for ADA accessible parking.
2.3. Pedestrian Mobility between Town Hall and State Route 22 No dedicated pedestrian facilities are present along Mountain View Drive between the Town Hall and State Route 22. There are sidewalks along State Route 22, and a marked crosswalk to cross State Route 22 to the Cambridge School Campus.

3.0 CONCEPT ALTERNATIVES
3.1. Standards
The proposed design layouts and recommendations are based on the following standards:
. NYSDOT Highway Design Manual (HDM),

. AASHTO Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets 7th ed., 2018,

. FHWA Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), 2009,

. NYS Supplement to the MUTCD,

. Empire State Trail Design Guide, October 2017

3.2. Cambridge Community Forest Parking Opportunities
Since parking within the immediate trailhead area and on-street parking on Rockside or Brookside Drive is not feasible within the existing right-of-way (ROW) and roadway footprint, additional auxiliary parking lot improvements should be considered to provide more parking opportunities for users of the CCF. One opportunity for additional parking is within the former roadway footprint and ROW of Old Route 313, which connects Rockside Drive to State Route 22. The roadway is currently barricaded off on the northern side near Rockside Drive and appears to be most recently used as a driveway to access adjacent properties along State Route 22, which have since been abandoned. The ROW of the former roadway is owned by the Village of Cambridge. A Highway Work Permit (HWP) from NYSDOT will be required for any work that overlaps onto State Route 22 or State Route 313 (Gilbert Street). The available ROW width of the former roadway is approximately 40 feet, which is enough space for one way travel operation and 45 parking stalls. If installed, traffic operation should be from Rockside Drive to State Route 22 and should contain 8-10 parking stalls. The recommended travel lane width is 14 feet, and the parking stalls should be 20 feet measured perpendicular to the edge of the travel lane to the edge of the parking surface. An asphalt pavement surface is desirable for the roadway and parking stalls to provide a durable surface and reduce the future maintenance of the roadway and parking area. Additionally, pavement markings should be installed on the asphalt to delineate the angled parking stalls. Wayfinding signage should also be installed to notify users that this area can be used for CCF parking and to direct them to the trailhead. EV charging stations should also be installed near the new parking stalls and connected to the existing utility pole for power supply.
Optional: To reduce parking along the roadways around the CCF, parking restriction signs along the roadways can be installed to limit parking for residents only. It appears that some residents may have already installed similar signs on their own on adjacent trees. All signs installed on public roadways should conform to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), which states that the legend on parking signs shall state applicable regulations. Parking signs shall comply with the standards of shape, color, and location. Therefore, the Town or Village may pass a local ordinance to restrict parking along these roadways for residents only and install signs indicating that this restriction is in place. Signs shall follow the requirements of the MUTCD and should include a green outline and text that reads Resident Parking Only or a sign with a red outline and text that reads No Parking Expect for Residents . The locally placed signs on trees should be removed to not cause conflicts with the MUTCD compliant municipally owned signage.

3.3. Town Hall Parking Opportunities
Improvements to the existing Town Hall parking area should consist of formalizing the parking by adding asphalt pavement and delineating spaces with pavement markings. Drivers will typically park their vehicles further apart from others when no pavement markings are present; therefore, reducing the number of available parking spaces. If paved within the existing footprint of the gravel parking area, the new asphalt parking lot will accommodate 30 vehicles. The two existing handicap parking spaces should remain in front of the Town Hall and an EV charging station could be added to the east side of the building. Additionally, there is a large grass field to the North of the Town Hall building that could be converted to parking in the future, if the need for more than 30 parking spaces arises. See Appendix B for conceptual plans.

3.4. Pedestrian Mobility Improvements between Town Hall and State Route 22
Until recently, the Town Hall parking area has been used as an informal drop-off location for the nearby Cambridge Central School. Parents would drop their children off at the Town Hall and the Children would then walk along Mountain View Drive and cross State Route 22 at the crosswalk with the assistance of a crossing guard. However, the drop off situation recently ended, and the school is no longer providing a crossing guard at this location. The option to install sidewalks along Mountain View Drive to provide pedestrians with a dedicated walking area still exists. Providing dedicated pedestrian facilities will allow residents to access Town Hall on foot, which benefits those who choose not to, or cannot, drive. The parcel of land in the northeast corner of the intersection of Mountain View Drive and State Route 22 is owned by the Town and a sidewalk could be installed directly from the crossing of State Route 22 to the Town Hall. Additionally, new ADA compliant sidewalk ramps should be installed at the State Route 22 crossing as the current crossing is not ADA compliant. This sidewalk connection along with an extension along State Route 22 in front of the Car Dealership would provide the continuous pedestrian facility between the Town Hall, pedestrian path or parking area along the abandoned road ROW, Rockside Drive, and the CCF.

3.5. Environmental / Permitting Requirements
Preliminary investigations into Environmental and Cultural Resources and potential impacts and recommendations are included in the following discussion, along with the anticipated permitting needs. Additional detailed environmental investigations will be required during the Engineering phase, depending on the type of funding that is secured.
3.5.1. Surface Waters Review of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) Environmental Resource Mapper (ERM) indicated that White Creek is a mapped NYSDEC Class C Stream with C Standards, is identified as resource PWL:1102-0026, and is a tributary of the Upper Hudson River. The ERM also indicated that the creek is listed as a 303(d) stream. No work is proposed to this stream. There are no mapped NYS wetlands located within or adjacent to the project area.
The National Wetland Inventory (NWI) mapping was reviewed to determine whether any wetland polygons are depicted within the project limits. There are no mapped NWI wetlands within or adjacent to the project area.
3.5.2. Flood Zone The 100 year flood zone of White Creek encroaches into the project area along Brookside Drive and a portion of Mountain View Drive. However, no proposed excavation work is located within the floodzone of the White Creek. See Appendix C for the Flood map.
3.5.3. Historical Resources A review of the New York State s Office of Historic Preservation s (SHPO) Cultural Resource Information System (CRIS) was completed. The review indicated that the corridor is not located within an historical district, and there are no recorded National Register (NR) Listed, Eligible buildings, or structures within or substantially contiguous to the proposed improvements. Coordination with SHPO should be progressed once the SEQR process begins and a Lead Agency for the project has been established or coordination with a permitting agency requiring SHPO coordination such as NYSDEC or USACE has begun.
3.5.4. SEQRA/NEPA Review If federal funding is obtained for the project, a review under the National Environmental Policy Act is required. The project will likely be categorized as a Categorical Exclusion. If state funding, federal funding administered by a state agency, local funding, or a permit is required from a state agency, then a review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act is required. The project will likely be categorized as an Unlisted Action and the Town of White Creek will be able to issue a Negative Declaration as the Lead Agency.
3.5.5. State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) If the excavation area of the proposed project disturbs more than one acre of land, then a SPDES permit (GP-0-20-001) and the development of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan will be required. The proposed parking lots/areas at Town Hall and on Old Route 313 total approximately 0.4 acres; therefore, will not require a SPDES permit at this time.
3.5.6. Anticipated Permits

-NYSDOT Highway Work Permit for work within the State Route 22 and Route 313 right-of-way.

4.0 COST ESTIMATES
Preliminary cost estimates were prepared for the four project elements and also combined to show the total project costs, if pursued as one project. The cost estimates were prepared with the assumption that the project would receive funding through a federal or state grant and constructed through the traditional design-bid-build process. Federal or state grant programs typically provide funding to cover 50% to 80% of the total project costs and require engineering and construction inspection services. The total anticipated project cost is $363,000.
*The draft study currently assumes that the EV Charging Stations would be level 2 equipment and 1 would be installed at the proposed new parking area along Old Route 313 and 1 would be installed at the Town Hall.

5.0 FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES
There are several potential funding opportunities that are available for pedestrian, parking, and recreational improvement projects. The Town should be aware that all the funding sources are reimbursement programs that will require the Town to expend the initial project costs and then receive reimbursements from the funding source. Most of the programs also require the local municipality to provide a portion of the total grant amount, which varies by program.
A/GFTC Make the Connection Program is available to assist municipalities with funding to improve the region s non-motorized travel network. Project types that are considered in the program include new sidewalk and trail connections, pedestrian safety improvements, and pavement marking improvements. Make the Connection funding is available through the FHWA and administered by the A/GFTC.
. 20% Local Match

. Design Only Projects have a minimum of $25,000

. Design & Construction or Construction Only Projects have a minimum of $75,000

. Federal Aid Procedures Apply

. EV charging stations are not eligible for funding through this program

NYSOPRHP Recreational Trails Program (RTP) provides funding for the development and maintenance of recreational trails or trail-related facilities. RTP funding is available through the FHWA and administered by the NYSOPRHP. RTP can be applied for through the NYS CFA that is due at 4:00pm on July 28, 2023.
. 20% Local Match

. Federal Aid Procedures Apply

. Design & Construction: Minimum = $25,000; Maximum = $250,000

. $1.9 Million available during the 2023 CFA application period

. EV charging stations are not eligible for funding through this program

NYSOPRHP Environmental Protection Fund (EPF) provides funding for the development and planning of parks and recreational facilities open to the public to preserve these lands for recreation, or conservation purposes. EPF projects can be applied for through the NYS CFA that is due at 4:00pm on July 28, 2023.
. Grant will fund up to 50% of total project cost

. Design & Construction: Minimum = $25,000; Maximum = $500,000

. $26.0 Million available during the 2023 CFA application period

. EV charging stations are not eligible for funding through this program

Northern Border Regional Commission (NBRC), Catalyst Program is designed to stimulate economic growth and inspire partnerships that improve rural economic vitality across the NBRC region that includes public infrastructure and outdoor recreation projects. The 2023 application process has already passed so the spring 2024 program should be targeted.
. 100% Federal Funds (0% Local Match)

. Federal Aid Procedures Apply

. $45 Million was available during the 2023 application period

. EV charging stations are eligible for funding through this program

NYSDEC Municipal Zero-Emission Vehicle Infrastructure Grant Program is available to municipalities for the installation of Level 2 or DCFC electric vehicle supply equipment that are for public use. The 2023 program has not been announced at this time.
. Up to 80% State Funds

. There is no project minimum cost; Maximum = $250,000

. Funding may be combined with the Utility Make Ready Program

Electric Vehicle Make-Ready Program is available in White Creek through National Grid to provide municipalities with funding assistance for the construction of the infrastructure necessary (transformers, meters, electrical panel, trenching, conduit, etc.) to support the Level 2 or DCFC charging stations for public use. The charging stations can be municipal pay to park or free parking locations. Currently the program can be applied for at any time.
. Up to 90% of costs are covered

. There is no project minimum or maximum costs

. Funding may be combined with the NYSDEC Municipal Zero-Emission Vehicle Infrastructure Grant Program

 

6.0 PUBLIC INPUT AND NEXT STEPS
A presentation was given at the White Creek Town Board meeting on July 11, 2023 which included an overview of the proposed concept plans and a question-and-answer period. Subsequently, a draft of this report was made available for a public comment period from July 12-August 8, 2023. Given that the project area is located within the Village of Cambridge, a discussion was also held at a Village Board meeting on September 6, 2023.
From this public outreach, four comments were received. The proposed improvements to the Town Hall parking lot were well received. However, there were concerns and opposition related to several aspects of the proposed CCF parking improvements and related parking restriction signage. Most importantly, the Village Board was not inclined to restrict parking on Rockside Drive due to concerns over enforcement and setting an unfavorable precedent. The Village Board also discussed the possibility of selling the abandoned Old 313 roadway in order to promote the redevelopment of the adjacent parcel to the west. This course of action could restrict the ability to construct the proposed parking improvements for the CCF.
Ultimately, the decision to pursue any of the concepts included within this report is the purview of the respective municipality. The analysis of existing conditions and development of the proposed concepts are intended only to provide information which can be used to inform the decision making process.

 

 

Warren County Rural Electric Vehicle Charging Station Analysis

Warren County Rural Electric Vehicle Charging Station Analysis
Prepared by: Adirondack/Glens Falls Transportation Council
April 11, 2023

The following text has been included to facilitate the use of screen reader technology. For the full report including graphics, please refer to the pdf file.

1. Introduction and Overview
a. Project Goals
Throughout the region, electric vehicles have grown in popularity as more consumers adopt this innovative technology. This trend is expected to increase further as efforts to reduce emissions ramp up to meet state and federal goals. However, despite the growth in popularity of electric vehicles, the deployment of charging stations throughout the rural areas of Warren County has not kept pace with the region. The investment required to install electric vehicle (EV) charging stations is significant, and the rapid evolution of technology and seemingly overwhelming amount of technical guidance may pose a further barrier to implementation.
This document provides a general overview of EV charging needs, gaps, opportunities, and challenges for the rural areas of Warren County, New York. The proposed analysis builds on the planning tools outlined in Charging Forward: A Toolkit for Planning and Funding Rural Electric Mobility Infrastructure, created by the US Department of Transportation1. As such, the intent is not to replicate existing guidance, but to provide an initial analysis to guide future policy and implementation efforts to establish EV charging stations throughout the rural areas of Warren County.
b. Project Study Area
The Adirondack/Glens Falls Transportation Council (A/GFTC) is the designated Metropolitan Planning Organization for Warren, Washington, and northern Saratoga Counties in New York State. A/GFTC is a regional association of governments, public agencies, and transportation providers responsible for conducting a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive transportation planning process. This analysis has been conducted by A/GFTC staff on behalf of the Warren County Planning Department as part of the 2022-2023 Unified Planning Work Program.
This analysis is focused on the rural areas of Warren County, namely, the portions of the county located outside the Urban Area as designated by the US Census. (See Figure 1). A/GFTC previously completed an EV charging station analysis for the Urban Area in 20152.
c. Methodology
There are a variety of factors which influence the location of EV charging stations. These include:
* Present and future demand
* Availability of required electrical infrastructure
* Distance from existing charging stations
* Land use
* Availability of incentives for installation
* Ongoing maintenance and operation costs
This analysis identifies geographic gaps and opportunities for future charging station locations on a community-wide scale as a way to provide guidance to local business owners and municipal officials. This plan will not identify specific parcels as future locations for EV charging stations, nor do the analysis results and/or recommendations constitute a mandate for public or private investment or construction.

2. Overview of current technology
a. Charging station types
At first glance, the electric vehicle charging technology can seem daunting, given the wide variety of electric vehicles, connector types, and charging station providers. However, at the most basic level, all charging stations can be categorized according to the speed at which the vehicle is charged.
> Level 1 equipment provides the slowest charge. These can operate from a common residential 120-volt (120V) AC outlet. Level 1 chargers can take 40-50 hours to charge a battery electric vehicle (BEV) from empty and 5-6 hours to charge a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) from empty. This type of charging equipment is suitable for residential use, usually to charge vehicles overnight. The estimated range per hour of charging is 2-5 miles.
> Level 2 equipment operates on 240V or 280V service, which can be accommodated at both residential or commercial applications. Level 2 chargers can charge a BEV from empty in 4-10 hours and a PHEV from empty in 1-2 hours. The estimated range per hour of charging is 10-20 miles.
> Direct Current Fast Charging (DCFC) (also known as Level 3) enables the fastest charging rates, making it a favored choice for high-traffic corridors and rest stops. DCFC equipment can charge a BEV to 80 percent in just 20 minutes to 1 hour. It is important to note that most PHEVs currently on the market do not work with fast chargers. The estimated range per hour of charging is 180-240 miles.
It should be noted that not all cars are compatible with all charging ports. Specifically, Tesla charging stations cannot be used by non-Tesla vehicles. However, Tesla vehicles can use an adapter to connect to non-Tesla charging ports.
b. EV range
This document is focused on EV charging stations; as such, the discussion of electric vehicle range is limited to vehicles which are capable of being recharged from an external power source, namely battery electric vehicles (BEVs) and plug-in hybrid vehicles (PHEVs). Hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) and fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) cannot be plugged in and are therefore excluded from this discussion.
> Battery electric vehicles also referred to as all-electric vehicles run on electricity only and are recharged from an external power source. They are propelled by one or more electric motors powered by rechargeable battery packs. According to the US Department of Energy Alternative Fuels Data Center3, almost all BEVs can travel at least 100 miles on a charge, and many new vehicles coming on the market offer an all-electric range of 200-300 miles or more.
> Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles incorporate a small internal combustion engine that can recharge the battery as the vehicle travels; the total range with a full tank of gas averages about 300 to 550 miles or more. PHEVs can usually drive moderate distances in EV mode using only the battery, typically from 15 to 50 miles in current models, according to the Alternative Fuels Data Center.
i. Considerations for residents
Current vehicle registrations in Warren County indicate that PHEVs outnumber BEVs by a significant margin. (See Figure 2). PHEVs with a full tank of gas have a much larger range than conventional vehicles; in addition, even with a low charge, PHEV owners can simply stop at a gas station to top up the tank before driving home. In addition, residents already have a clear idea of their daily driving needs in terms of milage; trips for work, school, and errands are often similar from day to day, allowing owners of PHEVs and BEVs to plan accordingly. As such, range anxiety may not be a significant consideration for Warren County residents seeking to drive within the county for day-to-day trips.
However, this is not to minimize the importance of expanding the network of available charging stations within the county. In particular, large employers should consider adding EV charging stations to their parking lots. Employment centers without significant customer activity (such as manufacturing or offices which do not provide customer service) would benefit from Level 2 chargers to allow employees to charge their vehicles while working. With gas prices fluctuating near historic high points and continuing competitiveness in the labor market, providing charging stations may be a critical factor in attracting and retaining employees. Employment centers with significant customer activity would benefit from providing either Level 2 or DCFC chargers, which may encourage people to patronize their business over a competitor. Finally, EV charging stations can also help businesses achieve sustainability goals, where applicable.
ii. Considerations for tourists
Although EV technology has made significant strides towards increased range in the last few years, range anxiety4 is still a concern for many to many visitors, especially in rural areas. Access to Level 2 and DCFC charging stations is a key consideration for trip planning. Online mapping tools are widely available to assist BEV drivers to plan routes around available charging infrastructure. Tourists driving BEVs will also keep in mind what activities are available within walking distance while the vehicle is charging.
Another consideration for locations where EV charging options are limited is whether existing charging ports are available to use. Online mapping tools allow drivers to see which charging stations currently have vacant ports. In areas with a high density of chargers, this allows a driver to find an open port before or during their drive. However, in rural areas such as Warren County, traveling between one community and the next may take over an hour, with limited cell phone range in between. EV drivers must therefore weigh the odds that a charging port will still be available when they arrive at their destination. If there are only a handful of available charging stations, and those ports are full, visitors may face the prospect of having to wait 1-2 hours (or even more) for ports to open up. This may serve as a disincentive to visit outlying areas, especially if there are no nearby activities to pass the time.
3. Analysis of current/projected needs
a. EV ownership trends
As stated previously, EV ownership has expanded significantly in the last few years. According to NYSERDA s EvaluateNY data portal, the number of EV registrations in Warren County increased over 700% between 2016 and 2021. In terms of the overall proportion of EVs to total vehicle registrations, Warren County lags slightly behind New York State and the Capital District as a whole. (See Figure 3). However, the overall share of EVs continues to increase. As additional incentives become available and more car manufacturers expand their offerings of EV vehicles, the trends of increased EV ownership are anticipated to continue.

b. Existing EV Charging Stations
Just as the number of EVs on the road has increased, so too has the number of charging stations. Since 2017, the number of charging ports in Warren County has increased from 9 to 214. (See Figure 4).

However, as the map in Figure 1 illustrated, the majority of these stations are located in the urban area of the county. Aside from pockets of charging infrastructure in the Village of Lake George and the hamlets of Bolton Landing and North Creek, options for EV drivers in the remainder of the rural areas of the county are very limited.
c. Range gap analysis
A distance-based range gap analysis was performed using GIS to determine the potential mileage afforded by existing EV stations. The parameters of this analysis were designed to be conservative, to provide a realistic worst-case scenario for BEV vehicles; as such, the analysis was intended to model range for the lowest-capacity BEVs while also taking into account potential diminished battery capacity during winter. To account for these variables, a range of 60 miles5 was selected. However, it is important to keep in mind that the average range of BEVs on the road in the Capital District today is about 255 miles under optimal conditions, according to NYSERDA s EValuateNY data portal.
Even considering the limited range of this conservative scenario, all areas of Warren County are within 60 driving miles of a public Level 2 or DCFC station. Under ideal circumstances, BEV drivers should be able to access the entire county; as such, the minimum requirements for charging infrastructure are met.
However, as stated above, charging options are limited in outlying areas. Although it is feasible to get from point A to B, visitors to Warren County may be less inclined to venture into more remote locations or to travel rural roads for the purposes of leaf-peeping or scenic exploration. These trips often benefited isolated businesses along scenic routes. To provide a greater incentive for BEV drivers, rural businesses which install Level 2 chargers may want to consider the addition of activities or amenities which increase the duration of the visit.
In addition, some municipalities have town-wide events, such as the Warrensburg Garage Sale or the Thurman Maple Days, which are heavily dependent on driving. Businesses and attractions which offer EV charging will create an incentive for BEV drivers to participate in these local events.
4. Recommendations
a. Best practices for site selection
The best locations for charging stations address convenience, safety, user-friendliness, and efficiency. Good candidates include:
* Public venues such as town halls, libraries, and museums
* Public parking areas near walkable downtown clusters
* Public or private parking areas for long-duration venues (restaurants, theaters, tourist attractions, medical clinics)
* Public or private parking areas within 1 mile of interstate exits
* Public parks and/or boat launches which have sufficient access to electric infrastructure
* Large employers, especially those not located within downtown areas
* Locations along busy roadways
Finally, although it is important to consider best practices, an imperfect site is better than none.
Once a site is selected, a number of factors may influence the specific location of the charging stations. For new development, the location of EV-only parking spaces can be integrated into the overall site plan prior to construction. However, in many cases EV charging stations will be retrofitted into existing parking areas. Considerations include:
* ADA access. Where possible, EV-only parking spaces should also integrate ADA design elements. Further detail regarding best practices for accessible EV charging can be found here: https://www.access-board.gov/tad/ev/
* Electrical infrastructure. All EV charging stations require sufficient electrical power to operate. For new construction, electrical conduits and other required elements can be integrated into the site plan. Retrofitting an existing parking area may involve digging trenches for new conduit to be extended from existing buildings or utilities, which can increase site costs substantially. Building-mounted charging stations may reduce the need for underground installations but may also require upgrades to the wiring systems in the structure.
* Visibility. In many cases, EV charging is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, even if the associated business or office is closed. For the security of EV drivers, charging ports should offer a high level of visibility to surrounding areas and should be well lit.

A detailed checklist of considerations is available here: https://www.energetics.com/projects/developers-and-planners-guide-to-electric-vehicles-and-charging-stations/EV-Site-Checklist-v07-2019.pdf
b. Community profile assessments
Although this analysis does not include individual recommendations for charging station types, an overall examination of EV station suitability was completed for the community centers/hamlets within rural Warren County. This is intended to provide broad context for both municipalities and local businesses, to inform priorities for expansion of EV charging infrastructure.
This assessment takes into account the following:
* Downtown clusters. To determine whether a community center contains a downtown area, GIS data from Warren County was utilized. Downtown clusters are defined as concentrations of community services, retail, recreation, employment, and housing within a walkable area, which increases suitability for EV charging stations.
* Number of community features. This includes amenities and services used primarily by residents: groceries, libraries, schools, town halls, health centers.
* Number of tourism/recreation amenities. This includes parks, attractions, golf courses, beaches, historic and cultural landmarks, shopping, and major hotels. These facilities are used by both visitors and residents.
* Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT). Traffic volume for the most-traveled roadway segment within the community (not counting interstates) was analyzed.
* Number of existing charging stations. The number of Level 2 and DCFC stations were examined. The assessment includes locations where charging stations are available primarily for patrons of specific businesses or for Tesla vehicles only; these facilities may not be easily accessible by the general public.

In terms of prioritization, Warrensburg stands out as having the highest traffic volume, number of community features, tourism/recreation attractions, while only containing one Level 2 charger. This represents a prime opportunity to expand the number of charging stations in the community, especially given the proximity to Exit 23 off Interstate 87.
In addition, Chestertown, Brant Lake, Stony Creek, Hague, and Thurman should also be considered priority communities, due to the lack of Level 2 charging stations available. Bolton Landing, North Creek, and Lake Luzerne are all good candidates for continued expansion of EV stations, building on the charging network already in place.
5. Implementation/Next Steps
As stated in the introduction, the two largest barriers for the installation of EV charging stations are funding and regulatory uncertainty. Steps that local business owners and municipalities can take to reduce these hurdles are outlined below.
a. Funding
In general, the two main costs of EV charging stations are associated with installation (including site preparation) and networking fees. Prices for the installation and networking of Level 2 and DCFC stations have fluctuated both up and down, due to inflation, supply chain issues, and advances in technology. Historically, the purchase price of Level 2 charging stations ranges from $1-4K per port and installation costs are $2-10k, inclusive of labor, materials, and permitting. The equipment cost of DCFC charging stations is about $25-50K, with another $50-100K in required electrical service upgrades. In terms of networking fees, until recently the annual cost could reach $10,000; however, recent expansion in the market has resulted in lower cost options which may be less than $1,000 per year.
One way to reduce installation costs is to integrate the potential for EV charging stations into new development proposals. By adding underground conduit and an additional electrical panel to new construction, the cost of installing EV stations in the future can be reduced by up to 33%. However, this option only applies to new development projects (or substantial redevelopment).
Funding programs are available to assist public and private organizations with the installation of EV charging stations. Opportunities for assistance vary depending on program availability, which in turn varies depending on the funding source.
For example, the popular ChargeReady NY program6 administered by NYSERDA ran out of funding in 2021. Although no announcements have yet been made, it is possible that this program will be renewed sometime in the future.
Similarly, statewide guidance for the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Program7, a new funding source focused on locations within one travel mile of designated EV corridors, is still being developed. (Interstate 87 is a designated EV corridor.) Over the next year, New York State will continue to determine the most efficient/effective way to provide NEVI Funding Program incentives to support the installation and operation of electric vehicle infrastructure and the availability of a trained workforce to support the operation and maintenance of this infrastructure.
Given the rapid changes in funding streams, it is highly recommended that any public agency or business seeking funding assistance first reach out to NYSERDA (transportation@nyserda.ny.gov) for the most up-to-date information. As of January 2023, current opportunities in New York State include:
* Utility EV Make-Ready Programs: Through this program, entities seeking to install or participate in the installation of L2 and/or DCFC chargers can earn incentives that will offset a large portion of, or in some cases, all of the infrastructure costs associated with preparing a site for EV charger installation. (https://jointutilitiesofny.org/ev/make-ready)
* New York State Tax Credit for Public and Workplace Charging: New York State provides an income tax credit of up to $5,000 for the purchase and installation of an electric vehicle charging station. The credit is targeted at commercial and workplace charging stations. The tax credit is available through the end of 2025. (https://www.tax.ny.gov/pit/credits/alt_fuels_elec_vehicles.htm)
* ZEV Infrastructure Grants: The Municipal ZEV Infrastructure Grant program provides grants to cities, towns, villages, and counties to install hydrogen fuel filling station components and Level 2 (L2) and direct current fast charge (DCFC) electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) primarily for public use. (https://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/administration_pdf/22zevinfs.pdf)
* FHWA Charging and Fueling Infrastructure (CFI) Discretionary Grant Program: The CFI Program is a new competitive grant program created by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to strategically deploy electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure and other alternative fueling infrastructure projects in urban and rural communities in publicly accessible locations, including downtown areas and local neighborhoods, particularly in underserved and disadvantaged communities. (https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bipartisan-infrastructure-law/charging.cfm)
In addition, USDOT has a consolidated matrix of federal funding programs which may be used towards EV charging infrastructure8. Please note that many of these programs are highly competitive and/or may not be available in the A/GFTC area. Many reputable EV charging station installation companies will be able to provide current guidance on funding opportunities.
b. Permitting
The permits required to install an EV charging station depend on the proposed location. In Warren County, all EV charging stations require a building permit from the County, with the exception of the City of Glens Falls and the Town of Queensbury; Glens Falls and Queensbury have their own building permit requirements.
In terms of the Adirondack Park Agency, the requirement for a permit depends on several factors, including but not limited to:
* Location inside or outside a Hamlet land use district
* Whether the installation will disturb wetlands
* Whether the EV station is a commercial or public use, including whether the users will be charged a fee
* If the EV station constitutes an expansion of the existing use under APA regulations
It is highly recommended that all project applicants submit an APA Jurisdictional Inquiry Form9 to determine the exact requirements for each site installation.
In addition, local regulations such as site plan review or special use permits may apply, depending on the zoning requirements of the municipality. Municipalities which are interested in supporting the installation of EV stations may elect to review and revise their land use regulations to streamline these processes. Table 2 outlines a range of options which support and encourage the installation of EV stations.

Table 2: Municipal Actions to Support EV Charging Station Expansion

ALLOW
* Define EV and EV charging stations in land use regulations
* Include EV charging stations in Zoning Use Tables, either as a permitted use or under site plan/special permit use
* Review zoning ordinances to ensure EV charging stations are permitted in logical locations such as commercial areas or hamlets
* Set high-level design, accessibility, and parking enforcement criteria
* Standardize EV charging station permitting procedures

INCENTIVIZE
* Lower or eliminate EV charging station permitting costs
* Add incentive zoning: EV charging station site preparation or installation in exchange for incentives such as fewer required parking spaces or density bonus

REQUIRE
* Require or set numerical or percentage-based goals for EV charging infrastructure in certain zoning districts or uses, especially commercial and multifamily
* Establish minimum number and type (level) of EV charging stations for development projects over a certain threshold
* Require conduit to be included in new parking lot projects

NYSERDA has compiled sample templates of local regulations, available at: https://www.nyserda.ny.gov/-/media/Project/Nyserda/Files/Programs/ChargeNY/Planning-and-Policy-Tool-Guide.pdf
Finally, it is recommended that municipalities seek training for Town Board, Planning Board, and Zoning Board of Appeals members as well as relevant staff. This will provide an opportunity for local municipal leaders to gain a more thorough understanding of the issues, opportunities, and challenges, as well as build momentum and support for the proliferation of EV stations throughout the region. Options for these types of training sessions may be available through the Clean Cities Coalition, NYSERDA, or A/GFTC.

 

Appendix 1: Resources and Links

1 https://www.transportation.gov/rural/ev/toolkit
2 https://agftc.org/publications/electric-vehicle-charging-station-location-analysis/
3 https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/search/
4 Range anxiety refers to the fear that an electric vehicle has insufficient energy storage to cover the road distance needed to reach the destination.
5 The ESRI Network Analysis tool modeled a 60-mile range according to the actual centerline mileage from existing EV charging stations.
6 https://www.nyserda.ny.gov/All-Programs/ChargeNY/Charge-Electric/Charging-Station-Programs/Charge-Ready-NY
7 https://www.nyserda.ny.gov/All-Programs/ChargeNY/Charge-Electric/Charging-Station-Programs/National-Electric-Vehicle-Infrastructure-Program
8 https://www.transportation.gov/rural/ev/toolkit/ev-infrastructure-funding-and-financing/funding-matrix
9 (https://apa.ny.gov/Forms/jiform.pdf)

2023 Bridge NY applications

Applications for the 2023 Bridge NY solicitation: Hudson Street over Mill Creek in Johnsburg (Warren County) and County Route 3 over Mill Brook in the Town of Putnam (Washington County).