Publication Type: Transportation Plans

TOWN OF WARRENSBURG
River Street Streetscape Revitalization Plan
WHERE HISTORY & WATER MEET
APRIL 2015
THE CHAZEN COMPANIES

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION …………………………………………………………. 1
HISTORICAL CONTEXT …………………………………………………. 3
VISION & OBJECTIVES …………………………………………………. 5
RIVER STREET CONCEPT PLAN ………………………………………… 7
PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATES & IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY … 18

APPENDICES:
A: EXISTING CONDITIONS ANALYSIS

RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PLAN

1
INTRODUCTION
Classified as a “Rural Minor Collector” roadway, River Street in
the Town of Warrensburg (NYS Route 418 and County Route
14) may not seem like it is a significant transportation
corridor.
1 However, as an Adirondack gateway community,
Warrensburg’s roadway s serve as a vital link to a sizable
portion of the Adirondack Park, particularly for northern and
western portions of Warren County . River Street is no
excep tion. As one of the p rimary connection s to the Town of
Thurman (including Thurman’s recently redeveloped railroad
station ), River Street has long been conduit for locals,
recreationists , visitors , and business alike.
Approximately 2.3 miles in length , River Street runs parallel to
the Schroon River ’s southern bank, providing important
1 NYS Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) functional classification
waterfront access. Between Judd Bridge and Richards Avenue,
River Street is owned by Warren County and designated as
County Route 14. West of Richards Avenue, the roadway is
owned by New York State and designated as NYS Route 418.
The western portion of the corridor is the principal collector
road to the Town’s Adirond ack Park Agency (APA) southern
Hamlet Area. It also serves as an important link to Main Street
(NYS Route 9, via Richards Ave and Judd Street bridges) as well
as to Warrensburg Elementary School and the Town’s
Recreation Field (via Milton Street Bridge and Library Avenue)
for residents that live south of the Schroon River.
Approximately 0.25 miles beyond the Milton S treet
intersection (near the National Grid Substation) the corridor
becomes increasingly rural in nature, offering splendid views
of the Schroon River and nearby forested mountain landscape
( see Study Area Map located at the end of this section).
Adjoining land uses include a concentration of residential
neighborhoods along Alden, Commercial, Mill, Ridge, and
Burdick Avenues. There are also a variety of recreation and
commercial uses: the proposed Paper Mill Park (former
Warrensburg Board & Paper Mill site), the Town’s Historic
Mills District Park and Riverfront Farmer’s Market , Grist Mill
Restaurant, River Street Plaza, Curtis Lumber, and Hickory Ski
Cen ter. This mix of land use supports a small but vibrant and
revitalizing community center.
Residents and visitors enjoying the bustling local farmers market
located along Rivers Street

RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PLAN

2
The Town desire s to enhance the River Street corridor. A
handful of pocket parks, a disconnected network of sidewalks,
variable road way conditions, and a number of impediments
within the right of way result in a streetscape that is visually
unappealing and may contribute to a number safety related
concerns among residents .
2 Among the greatest concerns is
the number of vehicular accidents involving utility poles as
well as the lack of pedestrian accommodations in select areas.
The River Street Existing Conditions Analysis ( see Appendix A )
provides a summary of these conditions.
In light of these issues, the Town of Warrensburg, with
funding and technical support from the Adirondack/Glens Falls
Transportation Council (A/ GFTC), has developed the River
Street Streetscape Revitalization Plan to address these issues.
The River Street Streetscape Revitalization Plan is also
intended to create a strategy that will help further revitalize
the corridor by attract ing funding opportunities for
improvements , pro mote new private investments, encourage
new visitors, and provide facilities that meet the needs of
existing and future residents. This plan does not obligate
Warren County or the New York State Department of
Transportation to any specific improvements. Although the
Town does not directly contr ol the roadway, it is hoped that
the collaborative process which was used to create this plan

Note that further technical analysis may be require d in order to verify 2
saf ety concerns that were i dentified by the Town and/or community .
will be carried forward as projects are completed in the
future.
Developed by a committee that consisted of local staff and
elected officials , as well as A/GFTC , Warren County, and NYS
Department of Transportation representatives , the River
Street Streetscape Revitalization Plan was prepared following
an extensive inventory and analysis process, walking tours of
the corridor, Farmers Market visits, stakeholder i nput, and a
Town Board workshop that was held April 8, 2015. This
participatory planning approach has resulted in a plan that is
based on a shared community vision . Further more, the plan
acknowledges that there are a limited local, state, and federal
f unding opportunities . Therefore , the plan is intended to be
both practical in design and implementable through strategic
partnerships and with diverse range of grant support.
From local commuting to recreationist, anecdotal evidence suggest
that cycling has increased in popularity along the River Street corridor

RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PLAN

3
HISTORICAL CONTEXT
Rivers Street’s close proximity to the Schroon River (and
confluence with the Hudson River ) has had a strong influence
on the Town’s industrial heritage . According to th e Historical
Park and Riverfront Farmer’s Market plaque (located along
River Street) , “timber, water, location…this winning
combination sparked development and fortunes of early
Warrensburg.”
3 This convergence of natural resources led to
the growth of sawmills, gristmills, plan ing mills, and tanneries
along the Schroon River in early ninet eenth century,
supporting job growth and development of working -class
residential neighborhoods . During this time period River
Street evolved to accommodate the demands of these
industrial land uses.
In 1870, Thomas C. Durant brought the ‘Adirondac ’ railroad to
nearby Thurman.
4 In 1909 a dam along th e Schroon River was
constructed, formi ng a large impoundment (Schroon River
Pond) and providing hyd ropower to the nearby Schroon River
Pulp Company (eventually renamed Warrensburg Wood &
Paper Corporation ).
5 This, coupled with roadway
reconstruction in 1912 by the NYS Department of Highways
3 The eastern portion of River Street is located within the Warrensburg
Hamlet Historic District (01NRO1752 )
4 Lake to Locks Passage (www.lakestolocks.org) 5 Warren County Historical Society
(www.warrencountyhistoricalsociety.org)
(now NYSDOT), buoyed the production and shipment of goods
and services, as well as visitors to the region.
However, according to the National Park Service (NPS), much
of this industrial base quickly “succumbe d to the economic
pressures of expanding national markets …,” throughout the
early part of twentieth century. While a handful of operations
(particularly milling) continued through the middle twentieth
century, a precipitous decline in local manufacture resulted in
the shuttering of many business along the River Street
corridor (including the end of passenger and freight service at

RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PLAN

4
Thurman Station) . In the absence of manufacturing, recreation
and tourism emerged as the region’s economic base industry.
Throughout the latter part of the twentieth century this
economic shift resulted in the adaptive reuse of several
buildings , which were turned into locally owned shops and
r estaurants. For example, in 1976 the Grist Mill was sold and
converted into a restaurant and museum. Later, t he Empire
Sh irt Factory was converted into the River Street Plaza, a mix
of commercial uses that include office, retail, and dining
space . In addition to these conversions several site s were
redeveloped into open space resources . For example, t he
Town’s Historic Mills District Park was once home to the J.R.
Foster’ s Shoe Peg Factory and the proposed Paper Mill Park
was once the Warrensburg Wood & Paper Corporation. These
changes have resulted in a River Street corridor that is
significantly different from its industrial past. From its
charming commercial district and quaint residential
neighborhoods to its open space and outdoor recreation resourc
es, the River Street corridor is now a place where
residents and visitors can enjoy shopping, dining out, riding
their bike , paddling, fishing, picnicking, or just watching the
Schroon River float on by .
As interest in heritage tourism, cycling, and water -based
recreation continue s to grow , coupled with an increasing
desire among Baby Boomers and Millennials to live, work, and
play in more walkable mixed use communities, there are many
new opportunities to capitalize on when it comes to the
continued revitalization of the River Street Corridor (as well as
the entire Town of Warrensburg ). These opportunities i nclude
new and improved waterfront access , expanded cultural and
recreational resources, improved pedestrian access and
amenities, historic interpretation design features, wayfinding
signage, aesthetic enhancements, and inc reased multimodal
opportunities (e.g., cycling, leveraging the reopening of
Thurman Station passenger service, etc.).

RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PLAN

5
VISION & OBJECTIVES
Today River Street is an important transportation, residential,
commercial, recreation, waterfront, and historical access
corridor. On any given day you will find resident s going about
their daily lives, walking, shopping, and traveling to school and
work. You may also find outdoor and recreation enthusiasts
fishing, kayaking, canoeing, jogging, or cycling up and down
the roadway and along the Schroon River. Local shops and
restaurants are often filled with patrons , particularly during
the warm months when seasonal residents and tourists fill the
area. In order to su pport the continued revitalization of the
River Street corridor, the future vision for its streetscape is
multifaceted and needs to address the following:
• Improved vehicular, multimodal, and pedestrian access
and safety for existing users and to support future
demands, taking into consideration new businesses,
cultural and recreational opportunities .
• Improved physical and visual access to existing and
new recreation and waterfront facilities.
• Improved interpretation of the corridor’s historic
resources and industrial legacy .
• Improved aesthetic quality of the corridor in order to
encourage new private investment and increased
visitation .
• Encourage d use of the Thurman Station by improving
physical and informational (e.g., signage, web based, etc.)
connectivity to River Street business and the
Town’s hamlet center .
• Acknowledgment that the corridor is not homogenous
when it comes nearby land uses and/o r physical
settings and that pedestrian related improvements
need to be context sensitive .
Ultimately the design objective for the River Street c orridor is
to create a more “complete street.” While traditional roadway
design s use a classification system ba sed on increasing
volumes and speeds , a more “complete street” in tegrates
various design features to control access and speed, thereby
making for a safer, convenient, and comfortable travel and
access experience for users of all ages and abilities regardless
of their mode of transportation. This integrated design
approach helps to reduce vehicle miles traveled and promotes
pedestrian mobility. Formally recognized by the NYS Complete
Streets Act in 2011 and by the Warrensburg’s Complete
Streets policy in 2012 and Complete Streets ordinance in
2013, a complete streets approach often includes a variety of
design features that make streets and communities more
livable .
According to the National Complete Streets Coalition (NCSC),
“a complete street may include: sidewalks, bike lanes (or wide
paved shoulders), special bus lanes, comfortable and

RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PLAN

6
accessible public transportation stops, frequent and safe
crossing opportunities , median islands, accessible pedestrian
signals, curb extensions, narrower travel lanes, roundabouts,
and more .”
6 The NCSC further states, “ A complete street in a
rural area will look quite different from a complete street in a
highly urban area, but both are designed to balance safety and
convenience for everyone using the road.”
T he Ri ver Street corridor consists of two (2) distinct land use
patterns, a more developed eastern portion and a rural
western portion. Therefore, a complet e streets design
approach that recognizes these differences is appropriate.
More specifically, it is recommended that the area between
the Judd Bridge and just beyond the Milton Street bridge
neighborhood include more robust streetscape
improvements . In turn, it is recommended that the western
portion (towards Thurman ) incorporate more subtle
improvements , including additional safety signage and wider
road shoulders wherever practicable.
Although complete streets enhancements can at times be cost
prohibitive , the River Street Streetscape Revitalization Plan
acknowledges this and advances a new vision for the corridor
by using practical and cost -effec tive design solutions.
Furthermore, future improvements are intended to be done
iteratively, thus spreading the potential costs over a longer
6 http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/complete- streets/complete-
streets -fundamentals/complete -streets- faq
period of time or as part of series of interrela ted public and
private projects .

Western portions of the River Street corridor is predominantly defined
by a more rural characteristic (courtesy Google Street View)
Residence and adaptively reused buildings line the eastern portion of
the River Street corridor (courtesy Google Street View)

RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PLAN

7
RIVER STREET CONCEPT PLAN
The River Street Streetscape Revitalization Concept Plan
(located at the end of this section) is divided into four (4)
sections: Judd Bridge to west of Mill Avenue (Figure 1); west
of Mill Avenue to Alden Avenue (Figure 2); Alden Avenue to
the National Grid Substation (Figure 3); and the National Grid
Substation to the Thurman Bridge (Figure 4). Figures 1 -3
provide a detailed rendering of the proposed corridor
improvements. Given the more rural character of the
corridor’s western portion, Figure 4 provide s a general
overview of the proposed improvements.
While the River Street Streetscape Revitalization Concept Plan
illustrates site -specific improvements , it is important to note
that the proposed design elements are conceptual in nature
and do not commit the Town of Warrensburg, Warren Cou nty,
AGFTC, or NYSDOT to fund any of these improvements .
Furthermore, additional analysis of the proposed design
elements is necessary (e.g., traffic safety analysis, warrant
analysis, etc.) during future design phases and/or before any
financial commitments can be made. Finally, it will also be
important to work with willing land owners in order to
implement select features. This includes any design elements that
extend s beyond the right of way limits and onto privately
owned lands.
7
As part of the Town’s 2012 Comprehensive Plan ’s hamlet
sustainability and complete streets goals, i t is important to
recognize that the revitalization of the River Street corridor is
a priority initiative for Warrensburg . As part of this effort,
Warren County recently repaved their portion of the roadway
and is in the process of install ing select improvements to the
Judd Bridge intersection .
Currently the repaving of the NYS -owned portion of the
roadway is not scheduled until 2017 at the earliest . This is a
case where the New York State Region 1 paving schedule is
asynchronous to the local priorities. The Town could work
w ith NYSDOT to determine if the S tate schedule has flexibility
for the paving to move forward sooner. However, given that
the Town also desires additional improvements , which would
not be part of a strict pavement preservation project, it may
be beneficial for the local agencies to pursue funding for the
no n-preservation elements (such as lighting, signage, etc.) in
7 Note the River Street right of way (ROW) is approximately 50 feet. Based
on real property data, approximately five (5) or six (6) parcels may be
impacted by the proposed improvements. Please note this estimate does
not include in -kind replacement of existing sidewalks or the relocation
select utility poles onto adjoining parcels. Furthermore, expanded road

shoulders may result in additional encroachments.

RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PLAN

8
the meantime. This may allow the Town to coordinate with
the State to complete these additional improvements in
tandem with the scheduled pavement preservation projects,
resulting in less disruption to the roadway. This is particularly
true where/if full depth reconstruction is required. However, if
NYSDOT is going to invest in roadway improvements, even for
preservation purposes, elements of the River Street
Streetscape plan should be taken into consideration in order
to support future growth and economic development
opportunities.
For organizational purposes the River Street Streetscape
Revitalization Plan recommendations (next page) have been
divided into the following categories: pe destrian safety and
amenities; multimodal access and safety; vehicle access and
safety; waterfront access and recreation; and interpretation,
wayfinding, and visual enhancements .
Recently repaved section of River Street near the Judd Bridge
Intersection. Note Warren County plans to install new crosswalks and
stop signs.

RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PLAN

9
Pedestrian Access & Amenities:
P roposed pedestrian enhancements to
the River Street corridor include
sidewalk replacements f rom the Judd
Bridge to the National Grid Substation. It
also includes new sidewalks that are
intended to enhance safety and improve
connectivity between existing sidewalk segments and
adjoin ing places of interest. This includes the Richards Avenue
Bridge Park , the southern side of River Street between
Richard s Avenue and Mill Avenue , and between the Historical
Park and Riverfront Farmer’s Market (hereafter ‘Farmers
Market Park’) and National Grid Substation . Please note that
some these improvements may require minor realignment of
the roadway and/or intersection and guiderail
reconfiguration.
Sidewalks must comply with ADA accessibility requirements
and be maintained during winter months . Wherever sidewalks
are impracticable due to existing infrastructure, site access , or
parking configurations (e.g., Judd Bridge, Grist Mill, Curtis
Lumber, etc.), pedestrian spaces may be defined using striping
or textured/contrasting surfaces (e.g., at grade concre te, etc.).
The plan also calls for improved crosswalks and new crossing
opportunities throughout the corridor. At a minimum it is
recommended that all existing crosswalks should be restriped.
Existing , relocated, modified, and proposed c rosswalks at Judd Bridge
, Veterans Park, Richard s Avenue, Mill Avenue,
Commercial Avenu e and Farmers Market, Alden Avenue, and
Milton Avenue should be well-connected to the pedestrian
access and/or intersection improvements. For example, the
proposed Veterans Park midblock crosswalk should link with
the re spective pedestrian walkway improvements.
These
improvements may also include modification to the existing
guiderails as well.
In addition to the above physical improvements, enhanced
pedestrian signage should be used to alert drivers. This not
only includes crosswalk signage but flashing beacons as well. If
warranted , flashing beacons in advance of the Veterans Park
midblock crosswalk as well as the crosswalks at Mill and
Commercial avenues (Farmers Market) should be considered .
In effort slow vehicle traffic approaching the Milton Avenue
Bridge neighborhood, a variable speed sign west of the
National Grid Substation should be conside red.
In the absence of crosswalks pedestrians are more likely to cross at
unsafe or illegal locations (courtesy Google Street View)

RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PLAN

10
Multimodal Access & Amenities : C ycling
continues to increase in popularity as a
mode of transportation, a method of
ex ercise, and as a recreational activity .
In response , the River Street Streetscape
Plan calls for a number of cycling related
improvements. While narrow travel
lanes , slower travel speeds , relocation of problematic utility
poles, and the installation of more bicycle friendly stormwater
grates will (and already do ) encourage and support cycling
between Judd Bridge and the National Grid Substation,
expanded road shoulders from t he substation to the Thurman
Bridge, coupled with shared roadway signage , are
recommended in order to enhance the cyclist’s experience
throughout the remainder of the River Street corridor.
Ongoing maintenance (e.g., street cleaning, snow removal,
etc.) of these improvements will further encourage safe
cycling as well. Additionally, bicycle racks at Veterans Park,
Richard s Avenue Park , Farmers Market Park , and the proposed
Paper Mill Park will help facilitate cycling.
The redevelopment and expanded use of Thurman Station
presents additional multimodal opportunities for the River
Street corridor and Town of Warrensburg. With increased
ridership, the Town, Warrensburg Chamber of Commerce, or
an alternative entity may consider providing scheduled shuttle
service from the Thurman Station to points along River Street and downto
wn Warrensburg. Improvements to River Street
should take into consideration possible transit service stops.
Narrow and poor road shoulder conditions along River Street can deter
cycling and can be contribute to a number of safety related concerns
Passenger train service at the Thurman Station continues to increase in
popularity (courtesy of flickr user Ironmike9)

RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PLAN

11
Vehicle Access , Travel & Safety: While
the primary focus of the River Street
Streetscape Revitalization Plan is to
improve pedestrian access and
aesthetic quality of the corridor, several
vehicular related improvements were
identified through the planning process .
(I t is important to reiterate that traffic related improvement
will require further traffic safety and warrant analysis during
subsequent design and/or funding phases .)
Proposed v ehicle related improvements include the
installation of stop signs at each approach to the Jud d Bridge
intersection . The current configuration, which currently has a
single yield sign at the Judd Street approach, can be confusing
to drivers, conducive to fast turning speeds, and does not
provide an opportunity for pedestrians to cross. R educed
turning radii using restriping and guiderails , coupled with new
signage, stop lines, crosswalks, and walkway and sidewalk
segments is believed to make a safer intersection for all users.
The Town and County are already collaborating to make some
of these improvements, especially con cerning the installation
of stop signs.
Similar improvements to the Richards Avenue intersection are
proposed . According to the existing conditions analysis there a
number of vehicle accidents at this intersection. Based on
community input and a review of crash data, limited line of sight
and the current two -way stop configuration may play a
role. The lack of a crosswalk is a cause for concern among
residents. As such, the installation of four- way stop, the
narrowing of turning radii, and the moving of stop lines in
order to improve line of sight is suggested . Turning radii need
to accommodate truck traffic . Further traffic analysis is
needed to ensure that these improvements will have a
positive impact. An alternate, more subtle approach , may
include simple restriping to accommodate truck traffic or a
mountable curb, and clearly defined stop lines and crosswalk s.
Th e Alden Avenue intersection may be improved by slightly
realigning (to make a T -intersection) and narrowing the
Poor striping, no stop lines, lack of crosswalks, wide turning radii, and
an awkward stopping configuration make for seemingly unsafe
intersection (courtesy of Google Street View)

RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PLAN

12
intersection in order to reduce turning speeds and limit the
distance pedestrians must cross .
Finally, the plan calls for a number of vehicle related access ,
travel, and safe ty enhancements . This includes resurfacing or
reconstruction of the roadway, traffic calming measures (e.g.,
additional speed limit signage, variable speed signs, etc.), and
select access management improv ements. Perhaps one of the
most important improvements is the relocation of utility poles
that are located within close proximity to travel lanes.
According to the existing conditions report there are a number
accidents that have involved problematic utility poles, some of
which have resulted personal injury. It also appears that a
handful of utility poles have also been struck by snow plows ,
which may impact the structural integrity of the poles.

Evidence of vehicle and/or snow plow impacts can be seen on several
utility poles within the corridor. Other utility poles are considerably
closer to the travel lane.

RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PLAN

13
Wa terfront Access & Recreation: There
are several formal and informal points of
a ccess to the Schroon River within the
River Street corridor. This includes
Veterans and the Farmers Market parks ,
as well as small pocket parks at Richard s
and Milton Avenues . Each offer s
opportunities for both active (primarily
fishing) and passive recreation . The Town
is also currently in the process of
developing a new waterfront park at the
former Warrensburg Board & Paper Mill
Company site, which was recently named
Paper Mill Park. In additio n to these park facilities are a
number of informal locations where outdoor enthusiasts can
access the waterfront via the River Street right of way.
However, these locations tend to be overgrown with
vegetation , located along steep embankments , and/or have
limited parking opportunities.
While canoe and kayak enthusiasts may take advantage of
these waterfront opportunities, the only formal boat launch is
located directly above the Schroon River hydroelectric dam.
The site is owned by Boralex and the boat launch is required
as part of their Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
license . This access point allows paddlers to enjoy the Schroon
River Pond impoundment, which extends from the dam to the
Milton Avenue Bridge . There are no formal access opportunities below the dam or above the
Richards Avenue
Bridge.
T he plan identifies several fishing and canoe and kayak access
improvements in order to enhance recreational opportunities
within the Schroon River corridor. T his includes enhancements
to Richards Avenue pocket park (a popular fishing location) as
well as the pocket park opposite Alden Avenue . More
specifically, improved sidewalk connectivity and small
riverfront trails at both locations should help increase
accessibility and usage . It also includes a more well- defined
parking area at Richards Avenue pocket park. The plan also
includes a new waterfront park at the National Grid
With no sidewalks and only small gap in the guiderail, the small pocket
park located opposite the Alden Avenue intersection has limited
accessibly (courtesy of Google Street View)

RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PLAN

14
s ubstation. The proposed park includes a parking area and a
cartop boat launch, which would provide access to the upper
reaches of the Schroon River Pond impoundment.
Finally, the plan supports the Town of Warrensburg’s effort to
develop Paper Mill Park at the site of the former Warrensburg
Board and Paper Mill Company. The proposed park is currently
in the design phase and the Town is now identifying elements
of the project that can be done using local labor forces. Once
complete , the park will include a portage from the existing
boat launch located above the dam to a cartop boat launch
that will be located below the dam. This will not only improve
accessibility for users of the park, it may also support through
paddlers and perhaps be part of a future Hudson River and
Schroon River blueway trail. A concept plan for the proposed
Paper Mill Park is included as the end of this section (see
Figure 5 ).
The Town’s proposed Paper Mill Park will provide enhanced waterfront
access below the Schroon River Dam. The park will also include a host of
other passive and active recreation opportunities

RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PLAN

15
Interpretation, Wayfinding , and Visual
Enhancements : Two of the Town of
Warrensburg’s greatest resources are
the Hamlet of Warrensburg and
Warrensburg Mills Historic Districts. As
previously noted a significant portion of
the study area is within the se historic
district boundaries. Signage identifying
the hamlet and historic district is
generally lacking. The River Street
corridor should include informational
signs that better identify the limits of the
historical districts and help interpret its
historical resources . Additional signage t hat helps visitors
navigate points of interest and local business should also be
included.
T he River Street Streetscape Revitalization Concept Plan
identifies several locations where wayfinding signage is
recommended (note c ertain wayfinding is subjec t to Manual
on Uniform Traffic Control Device s standards ). T his includes:
town -wide, historic district, and River Street gateway signage
at the T hurman Bridge, National Grid s ubstation, and Judd
Bridge, respectively; natural resource signage at select River
Street pull offs; a comprehensive wayfinding signage syste m
at the proposed Paper Mill Park; and historical interpretive
and waterfront access signage at the Farmers Market,
Richards Avenue, and Veterans parks, and proposed Schroon River Overlook (see below for more information).
It is
important to note that such signage should be at tractive,
include uniform and comple mentary design elements,
appropriately
scaled for the
intended user (e.g.,
vehicular traffic
verse pedestrians),
and highlight
landmarks, points
of interest and
access, and local
businesses. The
Town should
consider a
preferred signage
design strategy to
ensure visual continuity. It may consider using the signage
design scheme that is currently being developed for the Paper
Mill Park (see image left ).
Finally, the Town should explore additional ways to improve
visual access to the Schroon River waterfront and enhance the
aesthetic quality of corridor . For example, a unique design
feature that was identified during the planning process was
the Schroon River overlook near the Grist Mill Restaurant. The
c oncept includes a proposed walkway along the existing Grist
Mill parking lot that connects to an observation deck situated

RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PLAN

16
along the Schroon River riverbank. The walkway and overlook
could incorporate a number historical interpretive signs and or
features (e.g., historical industrial equipment that is currently
located on the property). While located on private property, a
public private partnership c ould bring this unique opportunity
to fruition.
As for the aesthetic quality of the corridor, a host of
l andscaping improvements, reconfiguration of select parking
areas, and pedestrian scale design features and amenities can
be employed to beautify the River Street streetscape and its
adjoining public spaces. Often referred to as corridor
beautification, the use of attractive period lighting (that
compliments the historic district), banner, pavers or pressed
asphalt, street furniture , planters, street trees, flowerbeds , as
well as public art displays not only instill a sense of local pride
and foster a greater sense of place, it ca n help attract new
investments and promote tourism. A rendering that illustrates
these design elements along the River Street is provided
below ( see Figure 6 next page).

Streetscape elements that are designed to complement one another
provide for an attractive and unique user experiences. These features,
coupled with landscaping and other enhancements, will help improve
the visual quality of the River Street corridor

RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PLAN

17

New sidewalks and striping can
be used to reduce curb cuts,
improve access management,
and enhance safety
Wayfinding signage should be used to
help residents and visitors navigate
the corridor and to identify local
business and points of interests
Encourage local property owners to
reinvest in properties along the corridor.
Provide support through funding
opportunities and/or technical assistance Attractive streetscape features such
as period lighting, bollards, benches,
banners, plantings and landscaping
are important design elements
Narrower travel lanes (wherever practicable)
along with thoughtfully planned and designed
crosswalks are important pedestrian safety
and traffic calming features
New or improved sidewalks, wider shoulders
and/or on-street parking, as appropriate,, and
relocated utility poles, coupled with additional
pedestrian and bicycle signage, will make for a safer

Figure 6: River Street Revitalization Rendering

RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PLAN

18
PRELIMINARY COST ES TIMATE & IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
There are several potential funding sources that may be used
to implement River Street Streetscape Revitalization Plan .
However, no one source will likely fund the project in its
entirety. As such, it is important to explore and leverage all
funding opportunities. Given the variety of funding sources
and strategies, it is important to continually examine priorities, possible alternatives, and implementation strategies
to champion the projects that are identified with this plan.
The estimated
2015 project cost for the River Street
Streetscape Revitalization Plan is approximately $4.0 to $5.9
million. Below is a summary of this estimate:
RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE
River Street Roadway (resurface vs. reconstruction) $865,000-$4,100,0001
Sidewalk Improvements (new segments only vs. new segments and replacement of existing) $236,400-$1,004,0002
Intersection Improvements (Judd Bridge, Ridge Avenue, Alden Avenue) $63,0003
Other Pedestrian Safety Improvements (e.g., bike safe stormwater drainage grates) $11,00
Other Streetscape Improvements (trees, lighting, utility pole relocation, gateway signage) $454,00
Select Park Improvements (Veterans, Richards Ave Bridge, Proposed Grist Mill Overlook , Historic
Mills District, Alden Ave Riverfront , Proposed Schroon River Waterfront Access )
$274,000
Total $1,903,400 – $5,906,0004
1Estimate does not include Warren County Portion of River Street 2From Judd Bridge to National Grid Substation 3Includes full depth reconstruction, paving striping, and select signage and guide rail improvements 4Estimate does not include Paper Mill Park project cost estimates

RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PLAN

19
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
While NYSDOT may be responsible for roadway repairs and/or
improvements , many projects (particularly improvement s that
fall outside the limits of the right of way or along adjoining
properties) are the responsibility of the Town , and will
therefore require strong local leadership. The portion of River
Street between Judd Bridge and Richards Avenue Bridge will
also require strong support from Warren County. Because of
this the To wn will need to partner with NYSDOT, Warren
County , and adjoining landowners in order to implement the
River Street Streetscape Revitalization Concept Plan. Given the
scale of the project i t is suggest ed that the T own conside r
dividing it into phases or priorities in ord er to make it more
attainable and attractive to a variety of funding programs . This
may include: 1) roadway improvements; 2 ) sidewalks and
pedestrian connections; 3) wayfinding and gateway signage;
and , 4) recreation and waterfront access .

• Roadway improvements: It is assumed that the
NYSDOT will complete a majority of the roadway
reconstruction and/or resurfacing as a component of
ongoing maintenance and preservation efforts. As
such, early engagement with the NYSDOT is
recommended in order to he lp foster a positive and
proactive partnersh ip with the Town. According to the
NYSDOT, other routes within the region have a higher
priorit y (e.g., NYS Route 9L, Route 28N , and Route 8) and
repaving of River Str eet will not occur until 2017 at
the earliest. As such, the Town should have ongoing
discussions regarding scheduling with AGFTC, NYSDOT ,
and elected officials in order to establish a
clearer/more predictable timeframe.
• Sidewalk, pedestrian connections , and amenities:
Many pedestrian improvements could be incorporated
into a NYSDOT funded work plan . Alternatively , with
grant funding and through a Betterment Agreement
with NYSDOT, the Town could construct select
pedestrian improvements (in conjunction with
repaving/reconstruction efforts) that are considered a
local priority . The Town could also construct select
streetscape amenities (e.g., lighting, wayfinding
signage, etc.) , park improvements , and waterfront
access opportunities (e.g ., the proposed Grist Mill
Overlook and Schroon River waterfront access area ) as
well . This would also include any improvements that
are not within the NYSDOT right -of -way.
• Wayfinding and gateway signage : Certain wayfinding
s ignage could be installed (in accord ance with the
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Device s standard)
throughout the corridor as part of a standalone
initiative or as a compliment to site specific (e.g.,
parks) imp rovements . T he timing and layout of future
improvements must be considered to avoid

RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PLAN

20
subsequent impact, removal, or replacement when
making other physical improvements. B ecause
wayfinding and gateway signage often require more in-
depth design or branding consideration s, it is
recommended that the Town develop a wayfinding
strategy (e.g., logos, signal art elements, etc.) for the
corridor in the near- term in order to achieve the
desired results (i.e., a visually appealing , uniform , and
well -coordinated user experience). The Town may
consider expanding the wayfinding strategy that is
currently being developed for the Paper Mill Park for
the entire River Street corridor.
• Site- specific enhancements: The Town may choose to
design and construct other site -specific projects
identified in the River Street Streetscape Revitalization
Plan ( i.e., Veterans, Richards Ave Bridge, Proposed
Grist Mill Overlook, Historic Mills District, Alden Ave
Riverfront , Proposed S chroon River Waterfront Access ,
Paper Mill P ark). T he Town could select a single si te to
focus their initial efforts and manage costs . On a
large r-scale the Town could choose to pursue funding
for all the site -specific projects. This latter strategy
would likely be more successful if the individual
projects were woven together by a single theme (e.g.,
as one single waterfront and/or historic resource
access initiative). Finally, absent NYSDOT support, the Town may choose to advance select
streetscape
improvements .
POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES
Given the overall cost to revitaliz e the River Street corridor,
responsibility cannot solely be borne by the Town of
Warrensburg. As such, funding assistance and material
support is essential in order f or the project to be successful.
Because of limited federal and state funding, NYSDOT is
primarily focused on “p reservation” of roadways and is less
likely to take on more elaborate reconstruction initiatives. Th e
Town of Warrensburg will have to take a greater leadership
role when it comes to advo cating for redevelopment of the
corridor.
With the exception of Urban Local, Rural Minor Collector, and
Rural Local classified roadways , all state road are eligible for
federal funding .
8 As noted in the Existing Conditions Analysis
(Attachment A), River Street is classified as a Rural Minor
Collector and is therefore not a “Federal Aid ” eligible roadway .
However, there is some precedent for using Federal Surface
Transportation Program (STP) Funds for safety and
bicycle/pedestrian -related priority projects, regardless of
location on or off the federal -aid system. The River Street
corridor is noted as a priority in the A/GFTC Bicycle Priority
8 https://www.dot.ny.gov/divisi ons/engineering/technical-
services/highway -data -services/functional -class -maps

RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PLAN

21
Network. In addition, the River Street bicycle -pedestrian
improvements may soon be listed as an “Illustrative Project”
in the regional Transportation Improvement Program. An
“Illustrative Project” is one in which current funding is not
available; if funding becomes available in the future, the
project may be considered for inclusion in the TIP. I n order to
determine the availability of funds and/or project eligibility
the Town should meet with NYSDOT and A /GFTC
representa tives to discuss next steps in this process .
T he Town should also work with the representatives from the
Capital Region Economic Development Council (CREDC) in
order to identify priority project or Consolidated Funding
Application (CFA) opportunities.
9 So me of these opportunities
are identified below while others are standalone funding
initiatives and programs:
• A/GFTC Make the Connection Program is intended to
assist with small- scale projects that “will improve the
region’s bicycle and pedestrian travel network.”
Announced on annual basis, the Make the Connection
Program requires a 20 percent local match and can be
used for a variety of small projects. However, it is
important to note that funding is limited and project
administration can be technically difficult in relation to
award amount due to administrative guidelines and/or
requirements. Nevertheless, the program may help
9 http://regionalcouncils.ny.gov/content/capital -region
implement a critical piece of the River Street
Streetscape Revitalization Plan.
• NYSDOT Transportation Alternative Program (TAP)
provides funding for transportation alternatives
including “on- and off-road pedestrian and bicycle
facilities, infrastructure projects for improving non –
driver access to public transportation and enhanced
mobility, community improvement activities, and
en vironmental mitigation.” Because the proposed
improvements are primarily focused on transportation
alternatives, several aspects of the project may be
eligible for funding through TAP program. It is also
important to note that River Street provides access to
the Warrensburg Eleme ntary School for nearby
students. As such, certain aspects of the project may
be eligible for TAP funding, specifically the Safe Routes
to School funding category.
• New York State Department of State (NYSDOS) Local
Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) funds are
available through the State’s Consolidated Funding
Application (CFA) process. As a Hudson River
community, and with the Schroon River recently being
identified asa designated inland waterway, monies
from the State’s Environmental Protection Fund (EPF)
may be used to prepare a wide variety of community
planning initiatives and projects. Because the Town has
already developed a partnership with the NYSDOS

RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PLAN

22
through its LWRP funded Comprehensive Plan, there is
a greater likelihood of being awarded funding support.
When pursu ing LWRP funding for the River Street
Streetscape Revitalization Plan the Town should focus
on Schroon River access and waterfront revitalization.
LWRP Grant requirements include a 50 percent local
match .
• Also available through the State’s CFA process are New
York State O ffice of Parks, Recreation, and Historic
Preservation Parks (OPRHP) funded programs. This
includes its Parks and Historic Preservation programs.
These individuals programs could be used to advance a
number of the plan recommendations. This includes
proposed park improvements, building preservation,
and select pedestrian improvements (if pitched as a
transportation alternative or historic trail experience).
If the Town does choose to pursue OPRHP funding it
should levera ge River Street’s historic district
designations.
• The NYS Environmental Facility Corporation (EFC)
Green Innovation Grant Program is a highly
competitive grant program that uses funding from the
US Environmental Protect Agency (EPA) and is
administere d under the Cl ean Water State Revolving
Fund. The Green Innovation Grant Program will
provide seed money for projects which spur green
innovation, build green capacity, and facilitate technology transfer throughout th
e State. Eligible
projects should be designed to water quality and
demonstrate sustainable wastewater infrastructure in
communities across the State . The Town could use this
funding source to design and construct stormwater
management features that are part of the proposed
River Street Streetscape Revitalization Plan.
Particularly for any d esign features that would focus on
improvement s Schroon River water quality .
• Through the NYS Department of Environmental
Conservation (NYSDEC) Adirondack Park Smart
Growth Implementation Grants , municipalities and
not -for -profits may request up to $75,000 (with no
required match) for “smart growth” related projects
that are wholly within the Adirondack Park. This
includes “capital projects and community development
initiatives that link environmental protection,
economic development and community livability
within the special conditions of the Adirondack Park.”
Given the flexibility of this program, funding could be
used for a number of recommended River Street
improvements.
• NYSDEC Urban and Community Forestry Grants
Funding seeks to encourage and assist municipalities
as they develop and implement sustainable local urban
forestry programs. Grants are designed to encourage
communities to actively enhance tree cover along their

RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PLAN

23
streets and in their parks, to properly care for and
maintain their community trees, to develop tree
inventories and management plans, and to inform
their residents of the value and benefits of urban trees.
The Town should consider pursuing this funding for
street trees along River Street.
• Glens Falls Hospital ’s Creating Healthy Places to Live,
Work & Play program provides monies for projects,
after the adoption of a local complete streets
resolution or through its grant program, that meet its
programs goals. This may include monies for signage
and small site -specific improvements. The Town of
Warrensburg has adopted a complete streets
resolution and worked with Glens Falls Hospital on a
number of complete streets initiatives. The Town
should continue to work with Glens Falls Hospital in
order to identify new funding and partnership
opportunities.

RIVER STREET STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION PLAN

APPENDIX A: EXISTING CONDITIONS ANALYSIS

The Chazen Companies
1

MEMORANDUM

To: Project Advisory Committee
From: Paul Cummings, AICP, LEED AP
Date: March 9, 2015
Re: Warrensburg River Street Streetscape Revitalization Plan t
Job #: 91418.00
This Existing Conditions Analysis has been prepared by gathering information through field visits, review
of existing resources, research, and Computer Aided Design (CAD) and Geographic Information Systems
(GIS) mapping.
Introduction
The focus of this streetscape project is River Street within the Town of Warrensburg (Warren County)
from the Judd Street Bridge west to the bridge across the Hudson the Town of Thurman (see Figure 1 in
A ttachment A) . Warren County owns the portion of roadway between Judd Street and Richards Avenue
(County Route 14) and NYS Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) controls from Richards Ave to
Thurman Station (NYS Route 418). River Street is functionally classified as a Rural Minor Collector, and
as such are generally not Federal Aid eligible. Consistent with the US Federal Highway Administration,
NYSDOT states that a Rural Minor Collector should have the following characteristics:
• Be spaced at intervals to collect traffic from local roads and bring all developed areas within a
reasonable distance of a collector road.
• Provide service to the remaining smaller communities.
• Link the locally important traffic generators with their rural areas.
The overall length of this roadway is approximately 2.3 ± miles. Over the length of this roadway a total of
three bridges span the Schroon River at Judd Street, Richards Avenue, and Milton Street. At the western
end of the Study Area a bridge crosses the Hudson River to Thurman Station. Land use along this section
of River Street is predominantly a mix of uses including residential, vacant, commercial, and community
services. The Warrensburg Mills Historic District is a national historic district and was added to the
National Register of Historic Places in 1975 from the Woolen Mill Bridge to the Osborne Bridge . It
encompasses a number of mill complexes and homes related to the de velopment of Warrensburg (see
Photo Log in A ttachment B).
The River Street right of way in this area is approximately 50 feet (three rods). However, this may be less
due to existing land uses and p hysical restrictions that may have limited the overall width of the road in
sections. Acquisitions along this roadway occurred in : 1916, 1933, 1936 and 1939 (2 each), 1941 and
1994 (see historic mapping in A ttachment C). Portions of River Street run adjacent to the Schroon River,
re sulting in narrow shoulders and steep banks along the river in in various locations .

The Chazen Companies
2

River Street serves as a link to Warrensburg’s “downtown” via the three bridges that cross the Schroon
River and provides a link to Thurman across the Hudson River . Traffic speeds along this section of
roadway are posted 30 mph and 55 mph , with numerous advisory speed limit signs due to geometrics .
The two lane roadway (one lane each direction ) travels in an eastbound/westbound direction along the
Schroon River. Roadway width varies throughout and is generally between 25 – 30 feet in width.
Parking along this roadway is prohibited near the intersection with Commercial Avenue at the site of the
farmer’s market .
Road Conditions
One of the tools that NYSDOT uses to identify where pavement work is needed (and what type of work
should be done ) is based on a Surface Rating that describes the severity and extent of pavement surface
distress for each segment of highway. The measurement of ride quality is also considered. While a
rating of 1 -10 is used, t he following four generalized surface conditions are used by NYSDOT to classify
roadways.
• Excellent – no significant surface distress
• Good – Surface distress beginning to show
• Fair – surface distress is clearly visible
• Poor – distress is frequent and severe
Surface rating of the roadway was given a score of 6 by NYSDOT which represents a fair condition with
surface distress clearly visible . However, in some locations the roadway condition may be described as
poor as the roadway moves further west towards the Hudson River. E xisting condition photographs
illustrate the cracking, potholes, and cold patch within the roadway (see Photo Log in A ttachment B).
The photos further show broken pavement along the shoulder’s edge as it transitions to an unpaved
surface. Years of patching and alligator cracking are evident. Recently a washout west of a National Grid
Substation (near Big Brook) occurred and has since been temporarily repaired. According to NYSDOT,
while it is recognized that paving 418 would be beneficial, due to the priority of other routes, repaving
will not likely occur until 2017 at the earliest.
Roadway and crosswalk striping is also generally poor throughout the Study Area as the striping is
broken, faded, and unclear in many spots. Acc ording to NYSDOT, this is a p aint (as opposed to epoxy)
route, which should be painted yearly. More detail is provided in the Vehicular Travel and Safety section
below.
Vehicular Travel and Safety
In July 2014, NYSDOT obtained updated traffic data for the section of River Street from Alden Ave to the
junction with Route 9 (see Table 1 and Attachment B ). The estimated average annual daily traffic (AADT)
was 1,336 vehicles eastbound and 1,288 vehicles westbound. During the period of data c ollection, the
average weekday peak was 136 vehicles per hour travelling eastbound, and 144 vehicles travelling
westbound. The average speed travelling eastbound was 30.9 mph and westbound was 31.2. The 85
th
percentile speeds for eastbound and westbound was 36.3 mph and 37.4 mph, respectively. The percent
of F4 -F13 heavy vehicles was 4.36, while the percent of F3 -F13 trucks and buses was 28.12.

The Chazen Companies
3

Table 1 – Traffic Count Notable Findings
Eastbound Westbound
AADT (vehicles) 1,336 1,288
Average Weekday Peak (vehicles /hour) 136 144
Average Speed (MPH) 30.9 31.2
85th Percentile Speed (MPH) 36.3 37.4
Percent Heavy Vehicles (Class F4 -F-13) 4.32% 4.40%

According to traffic accident data obtained from A dirondack/Glens Falls Transportation Committee
(A/GFTC) , for the past three years there have been a total of 47 accidents between 2011 and 2013 for
the section of River Street within the Study Area (see travel data in Attachment D) . Accidents have
largely been with other vehicles over this period of time. However, averages of nearly six accidents a
year are a result of a collision with fixed objects (light support, utility pole, guide rail, sign post) and the
roadway shoulder, ditch, or elevated bank. As shown in photos included within Attachment B , there are
a number of locations where utility poles are located within the roadway shoulder and in some
instances as close as 1-3 feet to the active travel lane.

13%
13%
7%
6%
51% 4%
4%

2%
Collisions (2011 -2013)
Earth, Elevated Rock, or Road Cut/Ditch
Light Support, Utility Pole
Animal
Guide Rail
Motor Vehicle
Sign Post
Other, Non-Collision
Overturned

The Chazen Companies
4

Further, the GIS data showing the location of these collisions indicate that four out of six collisions with
utility poles along River Street are between Richards Avenue and South Street (see Figure 2 in
A ttachment A ). This presents safety concerns for not only motor vehicles, but also for pedestrians and
bicyclists using this portion of the roadway. Another concentration of accidents , related to roadway
shoulder, ditch, or elevated bank was identified along River Street near Sue Ann Drive at the western
end of the Study Area. Sight line s in this location are likely an influencing factor. Accidents with other
vehicles are concentrated at intersections with Richards Avenue, South Avenue, and Milton Street.
Based on Town input, a lack of a four-way stop, proper signage, and roadway striping could be
contributing factors.
Data related to contributing factors for these accidents varies as they involve multiple factors and
multiple vehicles. Of note, over the three year period failure to yield right of way was identified as an
influencing factor 13 times and slippery pavement was counted 6 times. Other influencing factors of
note include driver’s inattention, animal involvement, alcohol, unsafe speed, disregarded traffic control
devices, and backing unsafely.
A site visit conducted in August 2014 identified the following observations as they related to vehicular
and pedestrian movement and safety along this portion of River Street (see Figure 3) .
• A number of u tility poles are located within very close proximity to the travel b
etween the Judd
Street Bridge and Veterans Park and between Richa rds Avenue to the Grist Mill.
• Guiderail along portions of the Richards Avenue Bridge can obstruct line of sight for motorists
• The intersection of River Street with Judd Street is controlled by a yield sign for traffic on Judd
Street with no roadway striping or crosswalks..
• There are multiple houses within 10± FT of travel lane in the section of roadway between the
Grist Mill and Curtis Lumber.
• A bank along a section of the road has been washed out along River Street near Big Brook where
water was impounding along an old rail bed (see Photo Log in A ttachment B).
Pedestrian and Multi -Modal Travel and Safety
Sidewalks within the Study Area are located on the non -river side of River Street beginning at the Judd
Street Bridge west to the intersection with Commercial Avenue. Sidewalks begin again approximately
300 feet further along River Street past the Curtis Lumber parking lot. They continue another 250 feet
just past Pebble Drive. Sidewalks pick up again at the intersection of River Street and Alden Avenue on
the non- river side . There is a 125± ft sidewalk gap before they pick up again at the intersection with
Johnson Drive. No other sidewalks are located within the Study Area, and no sidewalks are located along
the river side of River Street. In general, se ctions of sidewalk east of Richards Avenue are 3.5 feet wide
and are in fair to poor conditions. Sidewalks west of Richards Avenue are generally 5 feet in width are in
good condition.
Crosswalks along River Street are limited to the intersections with Commercial Avenue, and Milton
Street (Bridge). Crosswalks were not found at intersections with Judd Street (bridge), Richards Avenue
(bridge), Alden Avenue, or near the Board and Paper Mill site . A single pedestrian crossing sign is

The Chazen Companies
5

located at the northern end of the Warrensburg Historical Park (see River Stree t Inventory Map) . The
Warrensburg Riverfront Farmers’ Market can be found at this location. During the farmers market
orange cones are placed along the roadway and temporary pedestrian crossing signs are put up.
However, parking for the farmers market is scattered along the roadway and adjoin properties. As
vehicles and pedestrians navigate this area there are at times pedestrian an d vehicular related safety
concerns. More specifically, v ehicles are parked in the shoulder and grass areas along River Street, in the
Historical Park parking lot, at Curtis Lumber, and in unpaved areas at the intersection of River Street
with Commercial Avenue . All the while pedestrians cross the street as vehicles navigate a somewhat
congested roadway.
As discussed in the Vehicular Travel and Safety section, there are a number of impediments within the
right of way that present concerns for pedestrians and bicyclists within this area. This includes the
following:
• include utility poles located adjacent to travel lanes that limits bicycle and pedestrian
movements,
• Narrow travel lanes and shoulders ( particularly west of Milton Street to the Hudson River ) that
offers limited shared roadway opportunities ,
• Inconsistent/disconnected sidewalk network that limits pedestrian mobility in select areas and
raises safety concerns ,
• Unclear or nonexistent crosswalks at Judd Bridge and Richards Avenue intersection (note a lack
of crosswalks in other locations may also contribute to unsafe midblock crossing by
pedestrians) ,
• Storm drains along road shoulders that below surface grades due to rep aving and have grate
design s that present safety concerns for bicyclist ,
• Guard rail that may inhibit line of sight and/or restrict pedestrian access and mobility
(particularly near the bridges) ,
• Limited poor pedestrian signage.
Finally, It should be also noted that there is limited access to the Schroon River along this section of
roadway . While this may not be a pedestrian safety issue, members of the community have suggested
that additional access to the waterfront is desirable.
Land Use Characteristics
Land use along this section of River Street is predominantly a mix of uses including residential, vacant,
commercial, and community services (see Figure 4 in Attachment A). Noted land uses include: the Board
and Paper Mill site s, the site of a future waterfront park and car top boat/fishing access, the wastewater
treatment plant, and a cluster of other businesses and the Veteran’s Park . Within the Study Area a total
of 172 parcels are located adjacent to River Street. These parcels account for a total of 579 acres of land
(see Table 2) .

The Chazen Companies
6

Table 2 – Land Use
Property
Class Code Property Class
Total
Parcels % of

Parcels Total

Acres % of

Acres
100 Agriculture — — — —
200 Residential 113 65.7% 283 48.8%
300 Vacant 41 23.8% 68.8 11.9%
400 Commercial 10 5.8% 15.3 2.6%
500 Recreation and Entertainment 1 0.6% 0.2 0.0%
600 Community Services 3 1.7% 101.0 17.4%
700 Industrial — — — —
800 Public Services 1 0.6% 1.1 0.2%
900 Wild, Forested, Conservation

Lands and Public Parks 3
1.7% 110.0 19.0%
Total 172 100.0% 579.4 100.0%
Source: Warren County Real Property Tax Service Agency
Residential uses are the most predominant land use in terms of parcels and overall acreage. Vacant,
community services, and wild, forested conservation lands and public parks are the next most common
land use. The balance of the study area is largely made up of commercial, public services, and
recreation and entertainment. As shown on Figure 4 , it should be noted that there are a number of large
parcels at the western end of the Study Area that account for a majority of the land area. Businesses
within the Study Area along River Street are limited and include: the Grist Mill on the Schroon
(restaurant), R&D Transmissions, River Street Plaza, Curtis Lumber, and the Hickory Ski Center.

The Chazen Companies
7

Within the Study area there are a number of recreational resources that provide fishing, kayaking, water
access and cycling opportunities for residents and tourists to the area. These resources often generate
pedestrian activities and the Town desires to i mprove accessibility along River Street to these facilities .
Some of these recreational resources include the following :
• Veteran’s Park is l ocated on the Schroon River side of River Street between Catherine Street and
Burdick Avenue. The park includes picnic tables and a gazebo . Current access to the park
includes a parking area. There are no adjoining sidewalks or a crosswalk that would provide
improved access to the park.
• The Warrensburg Board and Paper Site (recently renamed Paper Mill Park) is the location for a
new Town recreation park along the Schroon River, which is currently in the planning stages.
A lternative concepts have been dev eloped that include: an observation deck, seating/viewing
areas, an event lawn, kayak put in, pavilion, parking, and trails throughout the site . The site will
include a new driveway and parking area for vehicle access. Along this portion of River Street
there are very limited/narrow road shoulders. Expanded road shoulder and shared roadway
signage would im prove access to the proposed park.
• The Hickory Ski Center operates a surface lift only ski area with more than five miles of skiing on
18 beginner to expert trails. The facility reope ned during the 2009-2010 season and again during
the 2013 -2014 season. Although Hickory Ski Center is primarily a winter operation, there are
discussions about expand ing services , amenities , and/or events during the warmer months.
Expanded road shoulders and shared roadway signage along River Street would improve
pedestrian and bicycle access to this important economic development entity .
• The pocket park located across from Alden Avenue near the Milton Street Bridge is blocked by
the guardrail and primarily includes a bench .
66%
24%
6%
0%

2%

0%

2%

Land Use by % of Parcels
Residential
Vacant
Commercial
Recreation and Entertainment
Community Services
Public Services
Conservation & Public Parks

The Chazen Companies
8

The Study Area is within the Warrensburg Mills Historic District , where historic manufacturing mills were
once located . Improvements to the River Street corridor will need to take into consideration the
distric t’s historical resources, particularly any potential impacts to unique landscape features and
historic prop erties.
The Warrensburg Riverfront Farmers’ Market is located on the Schroon River . The farmers market was
established in 1998 and sells locally grown, raised and prepared products including produce, plants, cut
flowers, dairy, poultry, meats, maple syrup, honey, wine, preserves, baked goods and refreshments. The
market is held Friday afternoons from 3 -6 p.m. from Memorial Day Weekend thru the end of Octo ber.
A ttachment s
A. Figures
a. Study Area Map
b. Collision Data Map
c. Roadway Inventory Map
d. Land Use Map
B. Travel/AADT Data
C. Photo Log
D. Historic Mapping

The Chazen Companies

Attachment A
Figures

Hudson River
Schroon River
9
45
9
State Route 418
Alden Ave
Riv erRd
Library Ave
River St
Smith St
Je
n n iJill
D r
Harr
in gto
n
Hil
l
R d
Ridge Ave
L
ibrar
y A
v
eExt
Milton St
Bow enHi
l
lRd
Mag giesRd
Burdick Ave
Ho
r
ic
o nA v
e
Mill Ave
Hillcrest Dr
Luse Ln
SummitS t
South Ave
WhalenDr
WoodwardAv
e
P l
ant
y
Dr
Newto
n
St
G e
orgeKnl
RyanAve
Stacy St
Sanford St
James StVern u
m
Dr
Mo o
s
eR idge
Rd
E
choL n
Ca
th
e
rin
e
St
R
ic
hards A
ve
B
eswic k D
r
Santol
i n
Dr
Hast ing
sSt
Karen St
Green Ter
KattsCorne r
s Rd
Comm
er
c
ialS
t
S toneRd
Per
r
y D
r
Hoffm
anDr
Skylark Ln
Je
n
niJil
l Loo
p
PineT
r
e e
Ln
Pratt St
Jo
h ns
o n
Dr
Rosalie Ave
C assi
u s P
ath
L
n
Te
r
r a
ceA v
e
B u
rhansAve
Scot
tDr
Parking Lot
Gr i
f fin
St
EchoLakeR
d
Stone St
BuyceCross
R
d
Combs Ln
Th
e
r
esa Ja
m esS
t
Br
owns Ct
Jenni Hill Dr
Bateman Dr
Sanford St
1 ” equals 420 ’
Warrensburg River Street PlanStudy Area Map
Town of Warrensburg
Warren County, New York
PWC
07/14/2014
91418.00
NA
Engineers/Surveyors
Planners
Environmental Scientists
Landscape Architects
CHAZEN ENGINEERING, LAND SURVEYING & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS CO., P.C.
This map is a product of The Chazen Companies. It should be used for reference purposes only. Reasonable efforts have been ma de to ensure the accuracy of this map.
The Chazen Companies expressly disclaims any responsibilities or liabilities from the use of this map for any purpose other tha n its intended use.
Dutchess County Office:
21 Fox Street
Poughkeepsie, NY. 12601
Phone: (845) 454-3980Capital District Office:
547 River Street
Troy, NY. 12180
Phone: (518) 273-0055North Country Office:
375 Bay Road
Queensbury, NY. 12804
Phone: (518) 812-0513
Drawn:
Date:
Scale:
Project:
Figure:
9
45
9River St
Smith St
Library Ave
Ridge Ave
Milton St
Burdick Ave
Mill Ave
Summit St
South Ave
State Route 418
Stacy St
Richards Ave
Alden Ave
Commercial St
Catherine St
Scott Dr
Stone St
B
u
rhan s
Av
e
Wood
ward A
v
e
Combs Ln
Sanford St
Evergreen LnTher
e s
a J
am
e
s St
Skyla
rk
L
n
H er r
ickAv
e
Luse Ln
Pine Tree Ln
Bateman Dr
JamesS t
C ed
arLn
E l
e
ctr
ic
Av
e
Schroon
State Route 418
S
an tol
i nDr
0
0.4
0.2
Miles
Hickory Ski Center
Board & Paper Mill
Warrensburg School
Frederick H. Flynn
Memorial Park
Warrensburg School
Board & Paper Mill
Frederick H. Flynn Memorial Park
River
S t
reet
River Street Study AreaHistoric DistrictCorridor Parcels
To Downtown
Rive
r
S
t
reet
Rive
r
S t
reet
To Thurman
Station

Hudson River
Schroon River
£
¤9
4 5
6
745
4
5
6
79
State Route 418
Alden Ave
Riv erRd
Library Ave
River St
Smith St
Je
n n iJil
l D
r
Harr
in gto
n
Hil
l
R d
Ridge Ave
L
ibrar
y A
v
eExt
Milton St
Bow enHi
l
lRd
Mag giesRd
Burdick Ave
Ho
r
ic
o nA v
e
Mill Ave
Hillcrest Dr
Luse Ln
SummitS t
South Ave
Wha
lenDr
WoodwardA v
e
P l
ant
y
Dr
Newto
n
St
G e
orgeKnl
RyanAve
Stacy St
Sanford St
James StVern u
m
Dr
Mo o
s
eR idge
Rd
E
choL n
Ca
t
h
e
rin
e
St
R
ic
hards A
ve
B
eswic k D
r
Santol
i n
Dr
Hast ing
sSt
Karen St
Green Ter
KattsCo rne
rs
Rd
Commer
c
ialS
t
S toneRd
Per
r
y D
r
Hoffm
anDr
Skylark Ln
Je
n
niJill Loo
p
PineT
r
e e
Ln
Pratt St
Jo
h ns
o n
Dr
Rosalie Ave
C assi
u s P
ath
L
n
Te
r
r a
ceA v
e
B u
rhansAve
Scot
tDr
Parking Lot
Gr i
f f
in
St
EchoLake
R
d
Stone St
BuyceCross Rd
Combs Ln
Th
e
r
esaJ a
m esS
t
Br
owns Ct
Jenni Hill Dr
Bateman Dr
Sanford St
²
1 ” equals 420 ‘
Warrensburg River Street Plan
Inventory of Collissions Map
Town of Warrensburg
Warren County, New York
GHM
09/24/2014
91418.00
NA
Engineers/Surveyors
Planners
Environmental Scientists
Landscape Architects
CHAZEN ENGINEERING, LAND SURVEYING & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS CO., P.C.
This map is a product of The Chazen Companies. It should be used for reference purposes only. Reasonable efforts have been ma de to ensure the accuracy of this map.
The Chazen Companies expressly disclaims any responsibilities or liabilities from the use of this map for any purpose other tha n its intended use.
Dutchess County Office:
21 Fox Street
Poughkeepsie, NY. 12601
Phone: (845) 454-3980Capital District Office:
547 River Street
Troy, NY. 12180
Phone: (518) 273-0055North Country Office:
375 Bay Road
Queensbury, NY. 12804
Phone: (518) 812-0513
Drawn:
Date:
Scale:
Project:
Figure:
4
5
6
745
4
5
6
79
River St
Smith St
Ridge Ave
Milton St
Library Ave
Burdick Ave
Mill Ave
SummitSt
South Ave
Stacy St
S
t
a t
e Ro
u
te
41
8
Com me
rc
i
alS t
A
lden A
ve
R ich
ard
sA ve
Stone StCombs Ln
S
cot
t
Dr
The
resa J
a m
es S
t
Bateman Dr
C e
d ar
Ln
Schroon River
State Route 418
Planty Dr
0
0.35
0.175
Miles
!
*
Hickory Ski Center
!
¡
Board & Paper Mill
!Þ
Warrensburg School
!
5
Frederick H. Flynn
Memorial Park
!
¡
!
5
!Þ
Warrensburg School
Board & Paper Mill
Frederick H. Flynn Memorial Park
River Street Study Area
Collissions
Earth, Elevated Rock, or Road Cut/DitchLight Support/Utility PoleAnimalGuide RailMotor VehicleSign PostOtherOverturned
To Downtown
! !To Thurman
Station
R
i
v e
r S
t
r e
et

EE
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
½
¾
¿
8 9:
w
b
c
d
p f
”
/
”
/
”
/
”
/
”
/
”
/ ”
/
”
/
”
/
”
/
”
/
”
/ ”
/
”
/
”
/
”
/
”
/
¡
¡
S
S
¡
¡
k ¡
j ¡
k
I A
£
¤9
4 5
6
745
4
5
6
79
River St
Smith St
Ridge Ave
Burdick Ave
Mill Ave
Summit St
South Ave
Stacy St
Catherine St
Milton St
Commercial St
Library Ave
Alden Ave
Stone StCombs Ln
Richards Ave
S ta te
R
ou
te 4
1
8
Scott Dr
Herrick Ave
Bateman Dr
Parking Lot
²
1 ” equals 100 ‘
Warrensburg River Street Plan
River Street Inventory Map
Town of Warrensburg
Warren County, New York
GHM
09/24/2014
91418.00
NA
Engineers/Surveyors
Planners
Environmental Scientists
Landscape Architects
CHAZEN ENGINEERING, LAND SURVEYING & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS CO., P.C.
This map is a product of The Chazen Companies. It should be used for reference purposes only. Reasonable efforts have been ma de to ensure the accuracy of this map.
The Chazen Companies expressly disclaims any responsibilities or liabilities from the use of this map for any purpose other tha n its intended use.
Dutchess County Office:
21 Fox Street
Poughkeepsie, NY. 12601
Phone: (845) 454-3980Capital District Office:
547 River Street
Troy, NY. 12180
Phone: (518) 273-0055North Country Office:
375 Bay Road
Queensbury, NY. 12804
Phone: (518) 812-0513
Drawn:
Date:
Scale:
Project:
Figure:
Frederick H. Flynn
Memorial Park
! 5
S
Building
¡
Hydrant
I
A
Pocket Park
j
Sidewalk Start
k
Sidewalk EndTelephone Poles
”
/
Storm DrainsGuide Rails
b c
d
p f
No Parking Sign
89: w
Pedestrian Crossing Sign
½
¾
¿
Temporary Speed Sign
E
Building CornerCross WalkStone Wall
To Downtown
0100200 50
Feet

Hudson River
Schroon River
9
45
9
State Route 418
Alden Ave
Riv erRd
Library Ave
River St
Smith St
Je
n n iJil
l
D r
Har
ringt
o n
Hil
l
R d
Ridge Ave
Librar
y
Av
eE
xt
Milton St
Bow
enHil
lRd
Mag giesRd
Burdick Ave
H
ori
c o
nA
ve
Mill Ave
Hillcrest Dr
Luse Ln
SummitS
t
South Ave
WoodwardAv
e
Wh alenDr
P
lant
y
Dr
Sanford St
Newto
n S
t
G eorgeKnl
James St
RyanAve
Stacy St
Vern u
m
Dr
Mo os
eR
idg
e Rd
E
c
hoL n
Ca
th
er
in
e
St
R ic
hards A
ve
B
eswic
k Dr
San
tol
in Dr
Hast
ing
sSt
Karen St
Green Ter
KattsCorne
rs
Rd
Comm
er
c
ialS
t
S toneRd
Perry
D
r
HoffmanDr
Skylark Ln
Dinu StJen
n iJil
l Loo
p
PineT
r
e e
Ln
Pratt St
Jo
h ns
o n
Dr
Rosalie Ave
C
assiu
s
P
ath L
n
Te
r
r a
ceA v
e
B u
rhansAve
Scot
tDr
EchoLakeR d
Parking Lot
Gr
i
f f in
St
B
uyceCrossR d
Stone StCombs Ln
Th
e
r
esa J
am e
sS t
B
rowns
Ct
Jenni Hill Dr
Bateman Dr
Sanford St
1 ” equals 420 ’
Warrensburg River Street Plan
Land Use MapTown of Warrensburg
Warren County, New York
PWC
07/14/2014
91418.00
NA
Engineers/Surveyors
Planners
Environmental Scientists
Landscape Architects
CHAZEN ENGINEERING, LAND SURVEYING & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS CO., P.C.
This map is a product of The Chazen Companies. It should be used for reference purposes only. Reasonable efforts have been ma de to ensure the accuracy of this map.
The Chazen Companies expressly disclaims any responsibilities or liabilities from the use of this map for any purpose other tha n its intended use.
Dutchess County Office:
21 Fox Street
Poughkeepsie, NY. 12601
Phone: (845) 454-3980Capital District Office:
547 River Street
Troy, NY. 12180
Phone: (518) 273-0055North Country Office:
375 Bay Road
Queensbury, NY. 12804
Phone: (518) 812-0513
Drawn:
Date:
Scale:
Project:
Figure:
9
45
9River St
Smith St
Library Ave
Ridge Ave
Milton St
Burdick Ave
Mill Ave
Summit St
South Ave
State Route 418
Stacy St
Richards Ave
Alden Ave
Commercial St
Catherine St
Scott Dr
Stone St
B
u
rhan s
Av
e
Wood
ward A
v
e
Combs Ln
Sanford St
Evergreen LnTher
e s
a J
am
e
s St
Skyla
rk
L
n
H er r
ickAv
e
Luse Ln
Pine Tree Ln
Bateman Dr
JamesS t
C ed
arLn
E l
e
ctr
ic
Av
e
Schroon
State Route 418
S a
n tol
i
nDr
0
0.4
0.2
Miles
Hickory Ski Center
Board & Paper Mill
Warrensburg School
Frederick H. Flynn
Memorial Park
Warrensburg School
Board & Paper Mill
Frederick H. Flynn Memorial Park
River
S t
reet
Land Use
ResidentialVacantCommercialRecreation & EntertainmentCommunity ServicesPublic ServicesOpen Space & ParksRiver Street Study Area
To Downtown
River
S
t
reet
Rive
r
S t
reet
To Thurman
Station

The Chazen Companies

Attachment B
Travel Data

STATION:
170028 New York State Department of Transportation
Traffic Count Hourly Report Page 1 of 2
ROUTE #: NY 418ROAD NAME:
FROM:
ALDEN AVE JCT RIGHT TO:
JCT RT 9 WARRENSBURG END RT COUNTY:
Warren
DIRECTION: Eastbound FACTOR GROUP: 40 REC. SERIAL #: CM27 FUNC. CLASS: 08TOWN:
WARRENSBURG
STATE DIR CODE: 6 WK OF YR: 29 PLACEMENT: 180′ N of Pebble Dr NHS: noLION#:
DATE OF COUNT: 07/18/2014 @ REF MARKER:JURIS: CityBIN:1048240
NOTES LANE 1: EB Lane ADDL DATA:CC Stn:RR CROSSING:
COUNT TYPE: VEHICLES BATCH ID: DOT-R1 WW29C ClassHPMS SAMPLE:
COUNT TAKEN BY: ORG CODE: TST INITIALS: MDB PROCESSED BY: ORG CODE: DOT INITIALS: JLB
12
TO 1 1
TO 2 2
TO 3 3
TO 4 4
TO 5 5
TO 6 6
TO 7 7
TO 8 8
TO 9 9
TO 10 10
TO 11 11
TO 12 12
TO 1 1
TO 2 2
TO 3 3
TO 4 4
TO 5 5
TO 6 6
TO 7 7
TO 8 8
TO 9 9
TO 10 10
TO 11 11
TO 12 DAILY DAILY
DAILY HIGH HIGH
AM PMDATE DAY TOTAL COUNT HOUR
1 T
2 W
3 T
4 F
5 S
6 S
7 M
8 T
9 W
10 T 11 F
12 S
13 S
14 M
15 T
16 W
17 T
18 F
19 S
20 S
21 M
22 T
23 W
24 T
25 F
26 S
27 S
28 M
29 T
30 W
31 T 133 103 152 145 92 77 78 52 43 28 19
6 2 3 6 6 16 39 77 110 123 122 151 125 113 117 124 105 100 82 77 72 51 46 21 1694 151 11
6 5 4 5 5 22 34 55 81 114 106 129 138 97 125 91 102 83 107 77 56 32 24 12 1510 138 12
4 4 2 4 18 47 97 138 103 107 118 97 111 100 97 111 96 90 77 54 48 35 16 5 1579 138 7
2 2 3 4 17 46 96 144 101 99 98 112 112 97 109 108 93 95 71 58 45 47 19 9 1587 144 7
7 0 1 6 14 52 92 129 124 96 120 95 113 102 101 99 89 85 77 50 33 34 11 9 1539 129 7
8 2 4 9 18 47 91 139 105 115 100 100 106 98 120 97 97 92 94 49 50 59 18 14 1632 139 7
5 2 2 9 21 48 93 129 129 107 116 90 91
AVERAGE WEEKDAY HOURS (Axle Factored, Mon 6AM to Fri Noon) ADT
6 2 2 7 18 48 94 136 112 105 110 99 110 99 107 104 94 90 80 53 44 44 16 9 1589
DAYS Counted
8 HOURS Counted
168 WEEKDAYS Counted
4 WEEKDAY Hours
102 AVERAGE WEEKDAY
High Hour
136 % of day
9% Axle Adj. Factor
1.000 Seasonal/Weekday Adjustment Factor
1.189 ESTIMATED
AADT1336
ROUTE #: NY 418 ROAD NAME:
FROM:
ALDEN AVE JCT RIGHT TO:
JCT RT 9 WARRENSBURG END RT COUNTY:
Warren
STATION: 170028STATE DIR CODE:
6 PLACEMENT:
180′ N of Pebble Dr DATE OF COUNT: 07/18/2014

STATION:
170028 New York State Department of Transportation
Traffic Count Hourly Report Page 2 of 2
ROUTE #: NY 418ROAD NAME:
FROM:
ALDEN AVE JCT RIGHT TO:
JCT RT 9 WARRENSBURG END RT COUNTY:
Warren
DIRECTION: Westbound FACTOR GROUP: 40 REC. SERIAL #: CM27 FUNC. CLASS: 08TOWN:
WARRENSBURG
STATE DIR CODE: 7 WK OF YR: 29 PLACEMENT: 180′ N of Pebble Dr NHS: noLION#:
DATE OF COUNT: 07/18/2014 @ REF MARKER:JURIS: CityBIN:1048240
NOTES LANE 1: WB Lane ADDL DATA:CC Stn:RR CROSSING:
COUNT TYPE: VEHICLES BATCH ID: DOT-R1 WW29C ClassHPMS SAMPLE:
COUNT TAKEN BY: ORG CODE: TST INITIALS: MDB PROCESSED BY: ORG CODE: DOT INITIALS: JLB
12
TO 1 1
TO 2 2
TO 3 3
TO 4 4
TO 5 5
TO 6 6
TO 7 7
TO 8 8
TO 9 9
TO 10 10
TO 11 11
TO 12 12
TO 1 1
TO 2 2
TO 3 3
TO 4 4
TO 5 5
TO 6 6
TO 7 7
TO 8 8
TO 9 9
TO 10 10
TO 11 11
TO 12 DAILY DAILY
DAILY HIGH HIGH
AM PMDATE DAY TOTAL COUNT HOUR
1 T
2 W
3 T
4 F
5 S
6 S
7 M
8 T
9 W
10 T 11 F
12 S
13 S
14 M
15 T
16 W
17 T
18 F
19 S
20 S
21 M
22 T
23 W
24 T
25 F
26 S
27 S
28 M
29 T
30 W
31 T 147 137 147 176 203 128 129 97 73 71 38
21 11 12 7 1 5 16 33 63 94 92 118 143 126 144 149 111 120 99 101 94 64 59 35 1718 149 15
27 9 5 3 3 5 12 28 41 72 77 109 112 83 161 121 120 92 81 92 79 57 36 30 1455 161 14
7 7 2 2 4 10 40 41 43 78 83 84 114 98 94 131 132 142 117 90 93 65 32 14 1523 142 17
8 5 6 5 5 7 40 33 71 84 84 82 106 90 100 146 153 138 95 72 76 71 29 32 1538 153 16
9 3 11 2 1 6 38 42 52 64 93 73 90 108 104 130 140 137 92 82 59 52 29 23 1440 140 16
11 8 3 7 1 12 26 38 62 58 70 76 107 94 123 133 151 149 107 97 89 76 69 33 1600 151 16
10 5 8 3 2 6 42 42 62 63 85 102 118
AVERAGE WEEKDAY HOURS (Axle Factored, Mon 6AM to Fri Noon) ADT
10 5 7 4 2 8 37 39 58 69 83 83 104 98 105 135 144 142 103 85 79 66 40 26 1532
DAYS Counted
8 HOURS Counted
168 WEEKDAYS Counted
4 WEEKDAY Hours
102 AVERAGE WEEKDAY
High Hour
144 % of day
9% Axle Adj. Factor
1.000 Seasonal/Weekday Adjustment Factor
1.189 ESTIMATED
AADT1288
ROUTE #: NY 418 ROAD NAME:
FROM:
ALDEN AVE JCT RIGHT TO:
JCT RT 9 WARRENSBURG END RT COUNTY:
Warren
STATION: 170028STATE DIR CODE:
7 PLACEMENT:
180’ N of Pebble Dr DATE OF COUNT: 07/18/2014

New York State Department of Transportation
Classification Count Average Weekday Data Report
ROUTE #: NY 418ROAD NAME: YEAR: 2014STATION:
170028
COUNTY NAME: Warren MONTH: July
REGION CODE: 1
FROM: ALDEN AVE JCT RIGHT
TO: JCT RT 9 WARRENSBURG END RT
REF-MARKER:
END MILEPOINT: 0351NO. OF LANES: 2
FUNC-CLASS: 08 HPMS NO:
STATION NO: 0028 LION#:
COUNT TAKEN BY: ORG CODE: TST INITIALS: MDB
PROCESSED BY: ORG CODE: DOT INITIALS: JLB BATCH ID: DOT-R1 W W 29C Class DIRECTION
NUMBER OF VEHICLES
NUMBER OF AXLES
% HEAVY VEHICLES (F4-F13)
% TRUCKS AND BUSES (F3-F13)
AXLE CORRECTION FACTOR
East
1573
3182
4.32%
28.48% 0.99 West
1524
3083
4.40%
27.76% 0.99 TOTAL
3097
6266
4.36%
28.12% 0.99
VEHICLE CLASS F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F9 F10 F11 F12 F13 TOTAL NO. OF AXLES 2 2 2 2.5 2 3 4 3.5 5 6 5 6 8.75
ENDING HOUR
DIRECTION East
ENDING HOUR DIRECTION West 1:00 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6
2:00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
3:00 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
4:00 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
5:00 0 12 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18
6:00 1 26 17 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48
7:00 2 60 27 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 93
8:00 4 99 27 0 4 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 137
9:00 1 80 27 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 112
10:00 0 75 24 1 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 104
11:00 2 75 27 1 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 110
12:00 2 68 25 0 3 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 100
13:00 1 73 26 1 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 106
14:00 1 68 25 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 97
15:00 4 75 22 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 104
16:00 2 65 30 1 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 103
17:00 1 63 24 0 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 93
18:00 2 63 21 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 89
19:00 3 54 19 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 78
20:00 1 40 11 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 53
21:00 2 31 10 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44
22:00 0 32 9 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 43
23:00 0 14 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16
24:00 0 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
TOTAL VEHICLES TOTAL AXLES 30
60
1095
2190 380
760 7
18 45
90 5
15 1
48
28 0
00
00
00
02
18 1573
3182
1:00 0 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
2:00 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
3:00 0 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
4:00 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
5:00 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
6:00 0 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
7:00 0 24 12 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37
8:00 1 23 11 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38
9:00 0 32 19 1 4 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 58
10:00 0 45 19 0 2 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 70
11:00 1 52 23 0 3 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 83
12:00 1 53 24 0 3 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 83
13:00 1 70 31 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 106
14:00 2 70 22 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 98
15:00 2 75 23 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 104
16:00 4 90 34 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 133
17:00 2 105 31 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 143
18:00 3 104 28 0 4 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 141
19:00 2 75 21 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 102
20:00 2 67 15 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 86
21:00 3 58 15 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 78
22:00 1 52 11 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 66
23:00 0 30 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39
24:00 0 23 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25
TOTAL VEHICLES TOTAL AXLES 26
52
1075
2150 356
712 1
245
90 6
18 4
16 8
28 3
15 0
00
00
00
01524
3083
GRAND TOTAL VEHICLES GRAND TOTAL AXLES 56
112 2170
4340 736
1472 8
20 90
180 11
33 5
20 16
56 3
15 0
00
00
02
18 3097
6265 — East
– -West
PEAK HOUR DATA
DIRECTION HOUR COUNT 2-WAY HOUR COUNT
East 8 137 A.M. 11 193
West 17 143 P.M. 16 236 VEHICLE CLASSIFICATION CODES:
F1. Motorcycles
F2. Autos*
F3. 2 Axle, 4-Tire Pickups, Vans, Motorhomes*
F4. Buses
F5. 2 Axle, 6-Tire Single Unit Trucks
F6. 3 Axle Single Unit Trucks
F7. 4 or More Axle Single Unit Trucks
F8. 4 or Less Axle Vehicles, One Unit is a Truck
F9. 5 Axle Double Unit Vehicles, One Unit is a Truck
F10. 6 or More Double Unit Vehicles, One Unit is a Truck
F11. 5 or Less Axle Multi-Unit Trucks
F12. 6 Axle Multi-Unit Trucks
F13. 7 or More Axle Multi-Unit Trucks
* INCLUDING THOSE HAULING TRAILERS
FUNCTIONAL CLASS CODES:
RURAL URBAN
SYSTEM
01
02
02
06
07
08
09 11
12
14
16
17
17
19PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL-INTERSTATE
PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL-EXPRESSWAY
PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL-OTHER
MINOR ARTERIAL
MAJOR COLLECTOR
MINOR COLLECTOR
LOCAL SYSTEM
SOURCE: NYSDOT DATA SERVICES BUREAU

— East
– – West
New York State Department of Transportation
Page 1 of 2
Speed Count Average Weekday Report Date: 08/19/2014
Station: 170028 Start date: Fri 07/18/2014 12:00 Count duration:170 hours
Route #: NY 418 Road name: End date: Fri 07/25/2014 13:45Functional class:8
From: ALDEN AVE JCT RIGHT County: WarrenFactor group:40
To: JCT RT 9 WARRENSBURG END RT Town: WARRENSBURG Batch ID:DOT-R1 WW29C Class
Direction: East Count taken by:Org: TST Init: MDB
Speed limit: 30
LION#: Processed by:Org: DOT Init: JLB
Speeds, mph
0.0- 20.1- 25.1- 30.1- 35.1- 40.1- 45.1- 50.1- 55.1- 60.1- 65.1- 70.1- 75.1- % Exc % Exc % Exc % Exc % Exc
Hour 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 70.0 75.0 95.0 45.0 50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 Avg 50th% 85th% Total
1:00 0 0 1 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.0 33.4 37.8 6
2:00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 22.5 22.6 24.3 1
3:00 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 34.8 35.0 38.6 2
4:00 1 1 1 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 26.2 31.3 39.8 7
5:00 0 0 2 8 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 34.2 34.4 39.5 18
6:00 1 2 6 23 13 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 31.9 33.3 38.4 48
7:00 0 3 13 47 29 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 32.7 33.3 38.0 94
8:00 1 3 27 74 28 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 31.7 32.6 36.9 136
9:00 0 3 26 59 22 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 31.7 32.3 36.7 112
10:00 1 3 26 58 15 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.9 31.9 35.2 104 11:00 2 6 40 50 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.5 30.8 34.6 110
12:00 1 7 27 49 13 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.2 31.5 35.0 98
13:00 1 7 35 53 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.9 31.0 34.6 107
14:00 2 9 32 38 16 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.4 30.8 35.8 98
15:00 0 6 34 51 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.5 31.3 35.0 106
16:00 0 6 30 52 14 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.7 31.5 35.0 103
17:00 0 4 26 47 16 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 31.1 31.9 36.0 94
18:00 1 2 20 47 20 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 31.4 32.4 36.9 91
19:00 1 3 17 39 18 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 31.3 32.5 37.3 80
20:00 1 3 14 24 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.4 31.9 36.7 54
21:00 0 4 14 20 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.3 31.2 35.3 45
22:00 0 4 13 20 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.2 31.2 34.9 43
23:00 0 0 4 7 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 32.6 32.9 38.3 16
24:00 0 0 2 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 32.6 33.2 37.8 9
Avg. Daily Total 13 77 410 776 282 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1582
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.9 31.9 36.3
Percent
Cum. Percent Average hour 0.8%
0.8%
1 4.9%
5.7%
3 25.9%
31.6%
17 49.1%
80.7%
32 17.8%
98.5%
12 1.5%
100.0% 1 0.0%
100.0% 0 0.0%
100.0% 0 0.0%
100.0% 0 0.0%
100.0% 0 0.0%
100.0% 0 0.0%
100.0% 0 0.0%
100.0% 0 66
Avg. Speed 50th% Speed 85th% Speed
East 30.931.936.3
West 31.232.437.4
Peak Hour Data
Direction Hour Count 2-way Hour Count
East 8 136 A.M. 11 194
West 17 144 P.M. 16 238

— East
– – West
New York State Department of Transportation
Page 2 of 2
Speed Count Average Weekday Report Date: 08/19/2014
Station: 170028 Start date: Fri 07/18/2014 12:00 Count duration:170 hours
Route #: NY 418 Road name: End date: Fri 07/25/2014 13:45Functional class:8
From: ALDEN AVE JCT RIGHT County: WarrenFactor group:40
To: JCT RT 9 WARRENSBURG END RT Town: WARRENSBURG Batch ID:DOT-R1 WW29C Class
Direction: West Count taken by:Org: TST Init: MDB
Speed limit: 30
LION#: Processed by:Org: DOT Init: JLB
Speeds, mph
0.0- 20.1- 25.1- 30.1- 35.1- 40.1- 45.1- 50.1- 55.1- 60.1- 65.1- 70.1- 75.1- % Exc % Exc % Exc % Exc % Exc
Hour 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 70.0 75.0 95.0 45.0 50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 Avg 50th% 85th% Total
1:00 0 0 0 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.6 33.4 37.0 8
2:00 0 0 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.1 33.8 38.2 5
3:00 0 1 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.7 32.6 37.8 6
4:00 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.7 30.0 37.0 4
5:00 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 34.8 35.0 38.6 2
6:00 0 1 0 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 32.2 33.2 39.8 7
7:00 0 2 6 15 11 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 32.7 33.6 38.9 37
8:00 0 2 8 17 11 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 32.0 32.8 37.8 39
9:00 2 3 14 22 14 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.2 32.2 37.7 57
10:00 1 5 17 31 13 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.6 32.0 37.2 70 11:00 1 8 25 36 12 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.8 31.2 35.6 84
12:00 0 6 23 40 12 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.7 31.6 35.7 83
13:00 2 7 27 50 19 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.3 31.8 36.4 107
14:00 3 5 23 46 18 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.1 32.0 36.6 97
15:00 2 6 21 54 18 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.7 32.2 36.8 105
16:00 2 6 26 68 31 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 31.2 32.5 37.1 135
17:00 1 4 26 76 32 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 31.9 32.7 37.5 144
18:00 2 3 23 68 39 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 32.1 33.2 38.1 141
19:00 1 2 16 50 28 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 32.4 33.2 38.2 102
20:00 0 4 20 38 21 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 31.8 32.6 37.7 86
21:00 1 2 17 37 19 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 31.6 32.7 37.7 79
22:00 0 3 16 34 11 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 31.3 32.0 36.1 65
23:00 0 1 11 20 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 31.7 32.2 37.1 41
24:00 0 0 2 12 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 34.0 34.2 38.6 24
Avg. Daily Total 19 71 324 730 334 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1528
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 31.2 32.4 37.4
Percent
Cum. Percent Average hour 1.2%
1.2%
1 4.6%
5.9%
3 21.2%
27.1%
14 47.8%
74.9%
30 21.9%
96.7%
14 3.3%
100.0% 2 0.0%
100.0% 0 0.0%
100.0% 0 0.0%
100.0% 0 0.0%
100.0% 0 0.0%
100.0% 0 0.0%
100.0% 0 0.0%
100.0% 0 64
Avg. Speed 50th% Speed 85th% Speed
East 30.931.936.3
West 31.232.437.4
Peak Hour Data
Direction Hour Count 2-way Hour Count
East 8 136 A.M. 11 194
West 17 144 P.M. 16 238

The Chazen Companies

Attachment C
Photo Log

River Street Photo Log Town of Warrensburg
Warren County, New York

September 22, 2014
Proud to be Employee Owned
Engineers
Land Surveyors
Planners
Environmental Professionals
Landscape Architects

River Street
– Warrensburg, New York Photo Log
September 22, 2014 1

Judd Bridge
View northeast Bridge at Richards Ave.
View northeast

W est of Veteran ’ s Park
View east West of Veteran ’ s Park
View east

Intersection of River St. and Ridge Ave
View southeast East of Grist Mill
View west

River Street
– Warrensburg, New York Photo Log
September 22, 2014 2
East of Grist Mill
View west West of Grist Mill
View east

West of Grist Mill
View west West of Grist Mill
View east

East of South St.
View east East of South St.
View west

River Street
– Warrensburg, New York Photo Log
September 22, 2014 3
East of South St.
View east Intersection of River St. and South St.
View east

Warrensburg Historical Park
View southwest Warrensburg Historical Park
View southwest

Warrensburg Historical Park
Warrensburg Historical Park
View west

River Street
– Warrensburg, New York Photo Log
September 22, 2014 4
Warrensburg Historical Park
View west Warrensburg Historical Park
View west

Intersection of River St. and Commercial Ave.
View east Intersection of River St. and Commercial Ave.
View east

Intersection of River St. and Commercial Ave.
View north Curtis Lumber parking lot
View northeast

River Street
– Warrensburg, New York Photo Log
September 22, 2014 5
South of Curtis Lumber
View northeast Crosswalk at Milton St.
View east

Bridge at Milton St.
View north Bridge at Milton St.
View east

West of b ridge at Milton St
View west West of b ridge at Milton St

View east

River Street
– Warrensburg, New York Photo Log
September 22, 2014 6

View east East of substation
View west

At pull off near substation
View west At washout near Big Brook
View southwest

At washout near Big Brook
View south East of Board and Paper Site
View west

River Street
– Warrensburg, New York Photo Log
September 22, 2014 7
Near Browns Drive
View west South of S Santolin Dr.
View east

The Chazen Companies

Attachment D
Historic Mapping

Electric Vehicle Charging Station Location Analysis

Prepared by: A/GFTC

February 2015

1
Introduction
Interest in alternative fuel cars is growing. In the A/GFTC area, electric or hybrid vehicles are registered
to owners in all but one zip code
1. Currently, the dominant type of alternative fuel vehicle is the non‐
plug‐in Hybrid, with 1,542 vehicles registered in the A/GFTC area. There are currently 70 vehicles
registered in the region which require plug‐in charging, including full‐size electric vehicles, Global
Electric Motorcars (also known as GEM vehicles), and
plug‐in hybrids. As deployment of plug‐in vehicles
continues to increase, A/GFTC can provide data regarding potential locations for Level II Electric Vehicle
charging stations. These types of charging stations supply 240 volts and can charge vehicles much faster
than a standard 120 volt plug.
There are currently seven
charging stations within the A/GFTC region ‐ four are located at hotels or
private businesses and are not intended to be used by members of the public. Two stations located at
Glens Falls Hospital, as well as one at Green Mountain Electric Supply on Corinth Road in Queensbury,
are available for public
use. Electric vehicles have also been noted using Level 1 charging in outlets
under the South Street Parking Pavilion in Glens Falls. As interest in electric and plug‐in hybrid vehicles
grow, demand for charging stations is also anticipated to increase.
Scope of Analysis
As an initial planning product, this
analysis includes only those municipalities within the Glens Falls
urbanized area, which includes the City of Glens Falls, the villages of Hudson Falls, South Glens Falls, Fort
Edward, and Lake George, and portions of the towns of Queensbury, Kingsbury, Moreau, Fort Edward,
and Lake George. This area was selected as the
most likely location for the initial deployment of public
EV Charging Stations. However, this analysis was designed to be easily replicated for any municipality
within the A/GFTC region.
This analysis is focused on public parking lots. This includes any facility owned by the municipality which
has surface parking spaces that
are used by the public, such as municipal centers, parks and recreation
areas, and public parking lots. These were identified using parcel ownership and land use codes as
identified in the data provided by the assessor of each municipality. The number of spaces in each lot
was identified though aerial photographs
or site visits.2 Public Works departments and firehouses were
not included as part of this analysis; however, future planning efforts could include these facilities.
In addition, the methodology outlined below could be applied to private facilities as well. Many
companies are choosing to locate Type II charging stations within their parking lots. This
can be a
favorable service for existing customers as well as an amenity which may attract a new customer base.

1 All data regarding electric vehicle ownership provided by NYSERDA 2 Some parking areas are unpaved or lack discernible pavement striping; the number of spaces in these lots was
estimated.

2
Methodology
The methodology for this project was driven by the availability of data and the goal of providing an
analysis useful to local municipalities. Since Type II charging stations require a few hours to charge a
vehicle, it was determined that duration of parking was the most important factor.
A 1/4 mile radius was
drawn around each parking area. This is equivalent to approximately a 5‐minute walk, a distance often
used in planning analyses as the maximum desirable walking distance. Within the radius of each parking
area, the potential for long‐ duration parking was tabulated using the following
statistics:
 Employment‐based activities. This data, supplied by NYSDOT through InfoGroup, includes
statistics on all businesses with more than 10 full‐time employees. (Note: Glens Falls Hospital
was excluded from the analysis because the facility already houses two on‐site charging
stations.) Two types of data were tracked:
o Number
of businesses with more than 10 employees. Many small businesses have
limited parking facilities dedicated for employees (if any). Providing charging stations in
areas with a high density of businesses could increase the likelihood that the charging
stations will be used.
o Number of employees.  This statistic allows the municipality
to determine how many
people are employed at the businesses listed above.
 Tourism/Lifestyle‐based activities. This data was provided by land use codes assigned by the
assessor.
o Long‐duration uses. These include any uses where the visit duration for an activity could
reasonably average 2 or more hours. This
includes theaters and other entertainment
venues, convention centers, active recreation areas, libraries, municipal centers and
courts, park‐and‐ride lots, and religious uses.
o Medium‐duration uses. These include activities which are not of long duration, but
could be combined with similar activities to add up to several hours. For
example,
shopping in a downtown and then eating lunch, or attending a medical appointment
and going to the post office. Uses include retail stores, restaurants, medical offices,
offices, post offices, passive recreation areas, playgrounds, and cemeteries.
 Proximity to transit. The number of GGFT transit service lines was tabulated, to allow
for
multimodal activity.

3
Analysis Results
Parking Facility Location # of
spaces
# of
transit
routes
Businesses
with 10+
jobs
# of
employees
Long
duration
uses
Medium
duration
uses
Glens Falls
East Field 65 Haskell Ave 345216519 28
YMCA Fire Road 15524223 45
Elm St. Parking Lot 214 Glen St  12511521161 884
South Street Parking
Pavilion 25‐33 South St 113931777 751
Crandall Park 576 Glen St 7036245 410
Ice Rink Fire Road 5423208 43
Haviland’s Cove Bush St 501150 10
Parking lot 34‐38 Warren St 241235673 660
City Hall Parking Lot 38 Ridge St 241140982 773
Exchange Alley 1 Hudson Ave 191150948 574
Lake George (Town and Village)
Beach Road (DEC) Beach Road 4653110 44
Beach Road (Village) Beach Road 96317427 533
Charles A Wood
Park West Brook Rd 9034215 615
Recreation Center Dump Rd. 80000 10
Municipal Offices 20 Old Post Rd 7219284 26
Parking Lot Ottawa St. 28320336 842
Parking Area Amherst St. 27324601 737
Usher park NYS 9L & Racawana
Rd 203225 43
Moreau
Municipal Park Route 32 & Bluebird 360000 11
Municipal Center Route 197 50000 11
Cooper’s Cave park River & First street 4718482 016
Fort Edward (Town and Village)
County Offices 383 Broadway 4601191242 215
Town/Village Offices 118 Broadway 4518445 526
Roger’s Island Visitor
Center 11 Roger’s Island Dr. 30000 10
Yacht Basin Satterlee Ln 2515390 220
Bradley Beach 25 Bradley Ave 1014375 415
Mullen Park Factory & Wing  614324 42

4

Parking Facility Location # of
spaces
# of
transit
routes
Businesses
with 10+
jobs
# of
employees
Long
duration
uses
Medium
duration
uses
Hudson Falls/Kingsbury
Town hall Center St & Route 4 65112433 645
Library/Village Hall Clark & Locust 62112437 639
St. Mary’s Church Wall St 16*111423 640
Queensbury
County Offices 1340 State Route 9 7302281071 39
Ridge Jenkinsville
Park 133 Jenkinsville Rd 277000 01
Town Hall 742 Bay Road 19026220 29
Airport 443 Queensbury Ave 1000584 13
Gurney Lane Park 118 Gurney Ln 10001101 13
Town Court 81 Glenwood Ave 50319615 240
Park & Ride Media Drive 3915403 210
Bike Trail Parking Country Club Road 3025132 19
Hudson River park Big Boom Rd 28000 01
Hovey Pond 21 Lafayette St 25428576 138
Park & Ride 105 Main St 1019470 212
West End Park Luzerne Rd 813373 23
Hudson Pointe
trailhead Hudson Pointe Blvd 5000 10
*58 spaces including St. Mary’s parking area

5
Using the Analysis
Each community may have a different goal for promoting the
use of electric vehicles, so a variety of data has been
provided. For example, a community could promote business
development by using the employment‐based data to
identify potential locations for charging stations. Similarly,
municipalities with
a tourist‐based economy could use the
long‐ and medium‐duration activities as the deciding factor,
so that the charging stations are more useful for visitors.
In addition to the tabular analysis, there are other
considerations for the location of a charging station. These
include:
 Visibility
. Consider locating charging stations in
spaces which are highly visible from major streets,
rather than those located behind buildings or at the
end of long driveways. This will raise awareness of
the station and increase usage. If low‐visibility spaces
are determined to be a high priority, consider adding
directional
signage.
 Parking Restrictions
. Some parking areas have time
restrictions or are fee‐based. Consider locating
charging stations in areas with minimal restrictions,
to promote usage.
 Pavement/Parking Infrastructure
. Several of the
parking areas included in this analysis are unmarked
or the pavement stripes have deteriorated.
Installation of a charging station may necessitate re‐
paving or re‐striping these facilities, as well as
improvements to accommodate the requirements of
the Americans with Disabilities act. In addition, there
are recommended
design guidelines for dimension,
signage, striping, and access of charging stations. See
Siting And Design Guidelines For Electric Vehicle
Supply Equipment for more information.
 Electrical Infrastructure
. Not all of the parking areas
included in this analysis have the necessary electrical
infrastructure in place to facilitate installation. See
sidebar for more information.
CONNECTION TO POWER
“When installing EVSE or EVSE‐ready
wiring, a dedicated circuit may be
required or optimal. This can be
added to an existing panel, or planned
for in new construction. Dedicated
circuits may require a new conduit, in
addition to the conduit running from
the panel to the EVSE’s
location. Costs
rise as cable length increases due to
the installation costs of construction
and trenching. Experienced installers
recommend not exceeding 25 feet of
conduit from panel to EVSE site, but
this will vary widely.
Most facilities have accessible 120V
circuits sufficient to power level 1
EVSE. Level 2 charging
requires 208‐
240 volts and at least 15‐30 amps.
Many jurisdictions require or
recommend a dedicated branch circuit
for level 2 charging. The existing
electrical panel in most installations,
especially older structures
constructed prior to 1960, will not
have the system capacity to handle
large and continuous loads. While
level
2 EVSE is similar to other
household appliances like clothes
dryers, the continuous nature of the
load may be a burden on the system.
Installation of dedicated branch
circuits/new panels may reduce safety
risk and assist with peak load
management in scenarios with
multiple charging vehicles.”
Source: “Siting And Design
Guidelines
For Electric Vehicle Supply
Equipment”, November 2012

6

Additional Resources
For more information on funding, siting, and installing charging stations, please see the following links.
In addition, A/GFTC has additional resources available upon request.

New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA):
http://www.nyserda.ny.gov/Energy‐Innovation‐and‐Business‐Development/Research‐and‐
Development/Transportation.aspx

Northeast Electric Vehicle Network, Guidance Documents including EV‐Ready Codes, Guide to Planning
and Policy Tools, and Siting and Design Guidelines: http://www.northeastEVs.org

Transportation & Climate Initiative, Siting and Design Guidelines for Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment:
http://www.transportationandclimate.org/sites/default/files/EV_Siting_and_Design_Guidelines.pdf

“Ready, Set, Charge: A Guide to EV Ready Communities”:
http://www.rmi.org/Content/Files/Readysetcharge.pdf

FINAL REPORT
JACKSON HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL TRANSPORTATION
STUDY

10.3.2014

the science of insight

55 Railroad Row White River Junction, VT 05001 802.295.4999 www.rsginc.com

PREPARED FOR:
ADIRONDACK / GLENS FALLS TRANSPORTATION COUNCIL
SUBMITTED BY:
RSG/CONTACT: COREY MACK, CONSULTANT

JACKSON HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TRANSPORTATION STUDY
PREPARED FOR:
ADIRONDACK / GLENS FALLS TRANSPORTATION COUNCIL

C O N T E N T S

i

1.0 INTRODUCTION ………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………….. 1
1.1 | Study Area …………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………. 2
School Characteristics ………………………. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 2
Adjacent Street Network ……………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 2
Travel Options to School …………………….. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 3
Drop7off Procedures …………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 4
Pick7up Procedures…………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 5
Crossing Guards …………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 5
1.2 | Purpose and Need ……………………… …………………………………………………………………………………. 6
2.0 TRAFFIC OBSERVATIONS ………………………… ……………………………………………………………………. 7
2.1 | Turning movements and pedestrian volumes … …………………………………………………………………. 7
2.2 | School Peak Traffic Volumes ……………. ……………………………………………………………………………. 8
3.0 SAFETY ANALYSIS …………………………….. ………………………………………………………………………….. 9
3.1 | Historical Crash Data …………………. ………………………………………………………………………………….. 9
3.2 | Anecdotal Crashes …………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………. 9
4.0 CONGESTION MITIGATION STRATEGIES ……………… ………………………………………………………. 10
4.1 | One7Way Jackson Avenue ………………… …………………………………………………………………………. 10
Short7Term …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 10
Long7Term ………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 11
4.2 | Shorten Crossing Distances at Jackson and Sa gamore ……………………………………………………. 11
Short7Term …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 11

ii October 3, 2014

Long7Term ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 11
4.3 | Modify Crossing Guard Procedures ……….. ……………………………………………………………………… 12
4.4 | Reduce parents parking on Jackson Avenue at peak times ………………………………………………. 13
Spread out the Staging Areas ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 13
Designate a Supervised staging area for before scho ol opens …………………………………………………………………………….. 13
Coordinate signing ………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 14
4.5 | Snow Removal and Storage Polices ……….. …………………………………………………………………….. 14
4.6 | Expand active transportation to/from school ……………………………………………………………………. 14
4.7 | Encourage Carpooling ………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………… 15
4.8 | survey parents’ resistance to active transpo rtation and carpooling …………………………………….. 15
5.0 IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX ……………………….. …………………………………………………………………. 16
5.1 | Short7Term Improvements ……………….. …………………………………………………………………………… 16
5.2 | Long7Term Improvements ………………… ………………………………………………………………………….. 17
5.3 | Recommendations ………………………. ………………………………………………………………………………. 17

FIGURE 1: SCHOOL CAMPUS WITHIN GLENS FALLS …….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 1
FIGURE 2: JACKSON HEIGHTS POPULATION OVER FIVE YEAR S ………………………………………………………………………………… 2
FIGURE 3: OFFSET JACKSON/SAGAMORE INTERTERSECTION W ITH CROSSING DISTANCES ……………………………………… 3
FIGURE 4: SCHOOL ENTRANCES ON SAGAMORE STREET AND J ACKSON AVENUE ……………………………………………………. 4
FIGURE 5: SIGNAGE AND CONES ALONG JACKSON AVENUE TO DISCOURAGE PARKING ………………………………………….. 4
FIGURE 6: MORNING AND AFTERNOON TURNING MOVEMENT AN D PEDESTRIAN COUNTS AT THE INTERSECTION OF
JACKSON AVENUE AND SAGAMORE STREET ……………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 7

FIGURE 7: NUMBER OF VEHICLES AND PEDESTRIANS UTILIZ ING THE JACKSON/SAGAMORE INTERSECTION EVERY
FIVE MINUTES DURING THE MORNING DROP/OFF PERIOD … ………………………………………………………………………………………. 8

FIGURE 8: NUMBER OF VEHICLES AND PEDESTRIANS UTILIZ ING THE JACKSON/SAGAMORE INTERSECTION EVERY
FIVE MINUTES DURING THE AFTERNOON PICK/UP PERIOD… ……………………………………………………………………………………… 9

FIGURE 9: COLLISION LOCATIONS ………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 9
FIGURE 10: COLLAPSIBLE TEMPORARY BARRIER……….. ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 10
FIGURE 11: LONG/TERM CROSSING DISTANCE REDUCTION .. …………………………………………………………………………………… 11
FIGURE 12: CROSSING GUARD IN CROSSWALK ………… …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 12
FIGURE 13: NEW PARKING AND DROP OFF AREA NORTH OF T HE SCHOOL ……………………………………………………………… 13

APPENDIX A. SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL: CROSSING GUARD GUIDELINES
APPENDIX B. AMERICAN AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION: SCHOOL SAFETY PATR OL OPERATIONS MANUAL

1

1 . 0 I N T R O D U C T I O N
On behalf of the Adirondack / Glens Falls Transport
ation Council, RSG has conducted an analysis
of traffic operations and overall safety at the Jack son Heights Elementary School in Glens Falls, NY.
The objectives of this study include:
· An evaluation of current access patterns,
· An evaluation of safety issues that are commonly obs erved
· Proposed short*term and long*term congestion mitiga tion strategies with improvements to
the circulation patterns and bicycle and pedestrian safety considerations.
This report summarizes the methods of data collecti on, the analysis techniques, a review of the
alternatives investigated, and short*term and long*te rm recommendations. This study has been
organized into the following sections:
Section 1.0 – Introduction : Provides background information, explains the goal s of this report,
states the formal purpose and need of the study and provides a general description of the campus
area, school characteristics, and adjacent street n etwork within the City of Glens Falls.
Section 2.0 – Traffic Observations: Documents the data collection methodology and prese nts the
observed operational characteristics of the
pick*up and drop*off periods.
Section 3.0 – Safety Analysis: Reviews
the available crash records and documents
anecdotal evidence.
Section 4.0 – Programmatic Congestion
Mitigation Strategies: Presents the
investigations into the various short*term
and long*term congestion mitigation
strategies.
Section 5.0 – Implementation Matrix :
Summarizes the strategies, costs, project
leaders, and other partners that will
participate in or support the proposed
mitigation techniques.

FIGURE 1: SCHOOL CAMPUS WITHIN GLENS FALLS

Final Report Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Jackson Heights Elementary School Transportation study

2 October 3, 2014

1 . 1 | S T U D Y A R E A
The analysis area for this transportation study is the Jackson Heights Elementary School campus and
the adjacent street network, including the Jackson Avenue and Sagamore Street intersection.

SCHOOL CHARACTERISTICS
Jackson Heights Elementary School is one of three e lementary schools in the Glens Falls School
District. The 75*year*old school serves kindergarten through grade 4, and currently has a population
of 252 students. Figure 2 illustrates annual
enrollment figures for the last five years. A
re*districting occurred in 2011 which
explains the jump in enrollment between the
2010*11 school year and the 2011*12 school
year. Enrolment has varied, but it is
generally considered stable.
ADJACENT STREET NETWORK
Jackson Heights Elementary School is located at the corner of Sagamore Street and
Jackson Avenue, both classified as minor collector roads and seeing relatively low
Study Area
Jackson Heights
Elementary School
FIGURE 2: JACKSON HEIGHTS POPULATION
OVER FIVE YEARS

3

volumes. A reduced speed school zone of 15 miles per
hour is designated by speed limit signs and
school warning signs in the vicinity of the campus. The speed limit is 30 miles per hour outside the
school zone. Sanford Street and Ridge Street, desig nated as minor arterials, are located within half a
mile of the school and have speed limits of 30 miles per hour.
Many side streets in the
study area are offset
from each other when
they intersect a main
road. This geometry
creates longer crossing
distances and
complicates vehicle
turning movements.
The Jackson*Sagamore intersection is an
example of this
geometry with the
western leg of Jackson
Avenue farther to the south than the eastern
leg (Figure 3). The
northern crossing on
Sagamore Street is
about 78 feet along the
crosswalk and the
eastern crossing on
Jackson Avenue is about 58 feet along the crosswalk. Pedestrians acce ssing the school by these crossings will require
additional time to cross than at typical crossings.
With the exception of Mauro Avenue, sidewalks are pr esent on at least one side of the street and, in
many cases, on both sides throughout the study area . This network of walkways is generally sufficient
to provide a route to the school from most parts of the school district; sidewalks are recommended
on Mauro Avenue to further encourage pedestrian acce ss to the school campus. Curb ramps in some
places are not flush with the pavement, and maintena nce is required on some sidewalk sections.
TRAVEL OPTIONS TO SCHOOL
Children are able to walk to school, ride their bicycle, or be driven to school. The school district is
classified as a walking school district, meaning th at bus service to and from the school is not offered
for most students. It is assumed that children live close enough to the school that they are able to
walk or bike, but many parents choose to drive their child. Driving is more common on winter days
and during inclement weather.
FIGURE 3: OFFSET JACKSON/SAGAMORE INTERTERSECTION WITH
CROSSING DISTANCES

Final Report Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Jackson Heights Elementary School Transportation study

4 October 3, 2014

Third grade students may participate in a bicycle
safety education program called the Bike Rodeo,
which is offered once per year as the weather warms
up in the spring. Third graders may not bike to
school unless they have participated in this program ;
all fourth graders are allowed to bike to school
regardless of past participation. Bicycle racks are
provided in the front and rear of the school, and
students are required to walk their bikes on school
property. During a site visit with ideal weather
conditions for active commuting, the front rack was
well utilized but had room for additional bicycles.
The rear rack was empty, likely because students do
not arrive near its location. It may be intended for
school employees or for use of the adjacent
recreational fields.
In 2006 and 2008, studies were conducted into travel
mode choice of parents at surrounding schools. The
main reasons for choosing to drive a student to
school rather than walk or bike were safety related ,
including perceptions about crime, and concerns
related to traffic and students walking alone.
DROP/OFF PROCEDURES
Kindergarten through second grade enters at the
main entrance A on Jackson Avenue, and third and
fourth graders enter at entrance C on Sagamore
Street (Figure 4). Students line up in front of the ir
respective entrances starting at 8:10 and are admitt ed
into the building between 8:20 and 8:30. Although
aides are present to monitor the students while the y
are lined up, the school is not technically respons ible
for the students until they enter the building. Thi s
arrangement encourages parents to stay parked in
front of the school until they see their child ente r the
building, which adds to congestion. The school
places cones along the curb to discourage parents
from parking (Figure 5), but parents will attempt t o
park in between them, just outside of them, and
occasionally drive over a cone.
FIGURE 5: SIGNAGE AND CONES ALONG
JACKSON AVENUE TO DISCOURAGE

5

Signs located along Jackson Avenue and Sagamore Stre
et were noted as being confusing, with some
signs saying “no parking stopping or standing any t ime” located between other contradictory “drop*
off and pickup only” signs (Figure 5).
Jackson Avenue frequently experiences congestion dur ing drop*off time. People will park on both
sides of Jackson Avenue, which leaves little room for through traffic or parents exiting. Given the
timing, parents are usually in a hurry to leave, and the congestion and resulting frustration can lead to
arguments between parents. Minor fender benders wer e reported as common, and the school’s front
office receives many complaints. Inclement winter we ather can compound the situation causing more
people to drive, slippery road conditions, and tall snow banks along the side of the road, roadway
width and student access to the school. Several time s in the 2013*2014 school year winter, students
waited inside from 8:10*8:20 to shield them from ver y cold days.
In contrast, drop*off at the Sagamore Street entran ce is not perceived as a problem. The roadway is
wider and longer, giving cars more room to maneuver. Parents are also less likely to wait for the older
children, which reduces congestion. Given the lack o f concern over the Sagamore entrance,
mitigation measures focus on the Jackson Avenue circ ulation and congestion through the Jackson
Avenue / Sagamore Street intersection.
PICK/UP PROCEDURES
Pick*up procedures differ in that many parents arri ve early, park, and wait for their children. Students
also may wait for their parents outside the school until their parent arrives. They cannot leave the
school until they see their parent. Kindergarten st udents are dismissed at 2:40 and then the remainder
of the students are dismissed at 2:45. Like drop*of f, grades three and four are staged on Sagamore
Street while the lower grades are staged on Jackson Avenue.
Generally, pick*up is more orderly than drop*off be cause some parents park well before their
children are dismissed. Some parents will also park on streets not immediately adjacent to the school
and walk to the school entrance to retrieve their ch ild. Parents and children also tend to congregate
on the sidewalk after school is dismissed, and this mass of people can create an obstacle for children
on bicycles, scooters, and skateboards, particularl y for inexperienced riders. On days where more
parents drive, such as rainy days, the congestion is more significant and causes unsafe situations.
Similar to drop*off, cones are placed along Jackson Avenue and Sagamore Street to discourage
parking.
CROSSING GUARDS
To assist the students in travelling to and from sc hool safely, a crossing guard is located at each of
three intersections:
· Jackson Avenue and Sagamore Street (All*way stop con trolled)
· Jackson Avenue and Ridge Street (Signalized)
· Sanford Street and Ridge Street (Signalized)
The crossing guards are part*time employees of the Glens Falls Police Department whose main
responsibility is to ensure that students cross the street safely. A traffic officer will work with crossing

Final Report Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Jackson Heights Elementary School Transportation study

6 October 3, 2014

guards when they start until they are comfortable with their duties. At unsignalized intersections, a
guard is instructed to stop all traffic to allow a pedestrian to safely navigate the intersection.
Crossing guard procedures were observed at the Jacks on/Sagamore intersection during the site visit.
When a pedestrian approached the intersection, the crossing guard would walk to the center of the
intersection and stop all traffic, including vehicle s that would not be in conflict with the pedestrian ,
then motion the pedestrian to cross the street.
Stopping all traffic prevents turning vehicles from b eing in conflict with pedestrians crossing the
street. However, it also stops some through movements unnecessarily and contributes to queuing at
the approaches. Although observed delays were shorte r than is typically deemed a problem, drivers
became frustrated at not being allowed to proceed w hen they perceived that there was no conflict.
Traffic was also lighter than normal on the day of the site visit due to the large number of students
walking and biking. The long crossing distances com pound this problem by increasing wait time. In
some cases, drivers proceeded through the intersecti on despite the presence of the crossing guard.
This situation put the crossing guard at risk of co llision and increased the likelihood of unintended
vehicle*pedestrian conflict, particularly for the el ementary school age children who may not be aware
of the potential danger of the intersections.
1 . 2 | P U R P O S E A N D N E E D
The purpose of this study is to develop short term a nd long*term recommendations to improve the
safety and use of Jackson Avenue in front of Jackso n Heights Elementary School and the Jackson
Avenue/Sagamore Street intersection during drop*off and pick*up times at the elementary school.
The need for this study is demonstrated by the cong estion and unsafe conditions in the study area.
Specifically:
· Arguments and fender benders between parents droppi ng off and picking up their children
are common in the study area.
· Driver frustration is common and frustrated drivers a re more likely to engage in unsafe
behaviors.
· Elementary school students are less aware their sur roundings than older students or adults
and therefore more likely to unknowingly place them selves in conflict with vehicular traffic.
· A car hit a student on a bicycle close to the study area.
· Congestion during peak times leaves inadequate space for emergency vehicles to park and
maneuver in front of the school.
· Snow events may result in unplowed sidewalks and sno wbanks in pedestrian paths, resulting
in greater potential for pedestrian*vehicle conflict , particularly in the morning.
These conditions present a clear danger to roadway users, both pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers.
It should be noted that the peak pick*up and drop*o ff periods are short, traffic volumes are low, and
the traffic delay and congestion exhibited at the s chool are acceptable according to industry
standards. Under similar motorist delay circumstanc es in commercial areas or along busy roadways,
an intersection would most likely not exhibit unsaf e conditions. It is likely the impatience of the road
users, or at least some of the road users, that are causing this danger. By increasing the perception of

7

acceptable delay and the time required to drop off
and pick up their children, the safety issues may
be resolved.
Unfortunately, appealing to poorly behaving drivers i s rarely a viable mitigation strategy. This report
will focus on two areas with the goal of improving s afety. First, we look to minimize the time drivers
and pedestrians spend in conflict points, and, idea lly, remove conflicts. Second, we explore ways to
reduce the congestion and increase the efficiency o f the intersection, thereby reducing frustration
and reducing dangerous behavior. Some strategies wor k towards both of these goals.
2 . 0 T R A F F I C O B S E R V A T I O N S
This analysis examines turning movements at the intersection of Jackson Avenue and Sagamore
Street on Wednesday, May 14, 2014 during the mornin g drop*off and afternoon pick*up times as well
as roadway volumes and vehicle speeds on Sanford Stre et and Ridge Street.
2 . 1 | T U R N I N G M O V E M E N T S A N D P E D E S T R I A N V O L U M E S
RSG performed turning movement and pedestrian crossi ngs counts from 7:40*8:40 AM and 2:15*
3:15 PM to capture traffic patterns while students were entering and leaving the school. Data was
recorded in five*minute increments to capture the sh ort peak related to school opening and closing.
The weather was clear and warm, which likely encour aged children to walk or ride their bicycles to
school. On cold, snowy, or rainy days, there are li kely more vehicles present and fewer, if any, people
commuting on foot and bicycle. Figure 8 shows the o bserved morning and afternoon turning
movement and pedestrian counts.
FIGURE 6: MORNING AND AFTERNOON TURNING MOVEMENT AN D PEDESTRIAN COUNTS AT THE
INTERSECTION OF JACKSON AVENUE AND SAGAMORE STREET

In the morning, half the vehicle traffic is traveling northbound on Sagamore and half of that
continues north on Sagamore. The rest of the traffi c is approximately evenly distributes between the
other three approaches.
Pedestrians crossing a street are shown in a box be hind the turning movements. Bicycles riding on
the sidewalk are included in these numbers. The maj ority of pedestrians (103, including 14 bicycles)
cross Jackson to the east of the intersection while equal numbers (15 at each crossing) cross
Sagamore north and south of the intersection. This pattern indicates that the majority of pedestrian
are traveling northbound on the sidewalk adjacent to Sagamore on their way to and from the school.
In most cases, an adult was observed walking with a child or group of children to the school and
then the same adult was observed walking in the oppo site direction alone after dropping the child

Final Report Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Jackson Heights Elementary School Transportation study

8 October 3, 2014

off. In this case, the adult was double counted, i.e. counted crossing the street first with the child and
then again without the child.
Only three bicycles were observed riding on the stre et during this period.
The afternoon vehicle traffic exhibits similar trend s to the morning with the majority of vehicles
traveling northbound on Sagamore and the remainder o f the traffic approximately evenly distributed
between the other three approaches. Overall, vehicle volumes are slightly lower in the afternoon than
in the morning.
Similar to the morning, the majority of pedestrians (102, including 3 bicycles) cross Jackson to the
east of the intersection. However, a large number of pedestrians (57) also cross Sagamore to the
north of the intersection, while fewer (12) cross S agamore south of the intersection. These numbers
are consistent with observations of parents parking on Jackson west of the intersection and
Sagamore south of the intersection, then walking to the school to pick up their child.
Five bicycles were observed riding on the street duri ng this period.
2 . 2 | S C H O O L P E A K T R A F F I C V O L U M E S
Figure 7 and Figure 8 show the number of vehicles an d pedestrians utilizing the intersection every
five minutes. A clear peak in pedestrian volumes is seen between 8:15 and 8:20 AM when the school
begins to let children enter. Vehicular traffic al so peaks at 8:20, although the trend is less
pronounced. In the afternoon, a clear peak in pede strian traffic is observed at 2:45, which is when
the majority of children are let out of school. How ever, vehicle traffic is largely constant throughout
this period. The lack of a spike in vehicular traffi c is likely due to some parents using the intersect ion
well before school lets out and then parking until they see their child. Others will park before the
intersection and walk to the school to pick up thei r child or not drive at all, thereby avoiding the
intersection. Inclement weather may increase the nu mber of parents driving to pick up their child,
which could create a spike around 2:40*2:45.
FIGURE 7: NUMBER OF VEHICLES AND PEDESTRIANS UTILIZ ING THE JACKSON/SAGAMORE
INTERSECTION EVERY FIVE MINUTES DURING THE MORNING DROP/OFF PERIOD

9

FIGURE 8: NUMBER OF VEHICLES AND PEDESTRIANS UTILIZ
ING THE JACKSON/SAGAMORE
INTERSECTION EVERY FIVE MINUTES DURING THE AFTERNOO N PICK/UP PERIOD

3 . 0 S A F E T Y A N A L Y S I S
3 . 1 | H I S T O R I C A L C R A S H D A T A
The Adirondack/Glens Falls Transportation
Council obtained three years of reported crash
data from October 2010 to September 2013,
illustrated in Figure 9. Note that the symbol at
the Sagamore/Sanford intersection represents
two crashes: one vehicle/vehicle collision and
one vehicle/bicycle collision. One collision
occurred at all other symbols.
Figure 9 only includes crashes that were
reported to and recorded by the Glens Falls
Police Department. As such, minor collisions
not reported to the police or collisions
involving small dollar amounts may not be
represented.
3 . 2 | A N E C D O T A L C R A S H E S
While no records were available regarding minor collisions, stakeholders noted that a
large number of crashes have occurred on
Jackson Avenue near the school. These are likely low speed collisions associated with vehicles
arriving or departing the school, so damage would be minor. However, the existence of these
collisions shows that congestion is a problem in th e area and that some parents are not paying
FIGURE 9: COLLISION LOCATIONS

Final Report Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Jackson Heights Elementary School Transportation study

10 October 3, 2014

adequate attention to their surroundings as they enter or exit the school. This situation is particularly
dangerous in the presence of young children who may be less observant of traffic. Even at low
speeds, a vehicle collision with a child could cause significant injuries.
4 . 0 C O N G E S T I O N M I T I G A T I O N S T R A T E G I E S
The primary issues that have arisen out of the study are summarized below:
· Congestion during pick*up and drop*off cause to arg uments and fender benders
· Driver frustration is common and can lead to unsafe behaviors.
· Vehicles entering and exiting the school area may c onflict with the children also occupying
that space.
· Congestion and queuing seem excessive for the amount of traffic present in the study area
· Congestion during peak times leaves inadequate space for emergency vehicles to park and
maneuver in front of the school.
The following sections discuss potential strategies that may be employed to address these issues.
4 . 1 | O N E / W A Y J A C K S O N A V E N U E
The Jackson Heights Parent Teacher Association (PTA ) requested that this study consider a one*way
Jackson Avenue. This realignment has a number of adva ntages:
· Simplifies driving on Jackson Avenue and turning movem ents at the intersection
· Prevents vehicles from attempting to turn around on J ackson Avenue
· Unused travel lane can be used for pick*up and drop* off
· Reduces the number of children crossing the Jackson Avenue
· Emergency vehicles will have an easier time navigating the street
It is suggested that Jackson Avenue be made one*way
westbound from Mauro Street to the intersection wit h
Sagamore Street. Cars will drive on the same side of the street
as the school making drop*off and pick*up easier. I f there is
inadequate space for arriving vehicles, they will spi ll back into
Mauro Street rather than the Jackson*Sagamore inter section.
Any proposed changes to the circulation along Jacks on Avenue
should be reviewed and approved by the appropriate em ergency
response personnel.
SHORT/TERM
A one*way Jackson Avenue can be created by placing a temporary barrier such as the one shown in
Figure 10 at the entrance to the eastbound lane of Jackson Avenue. It should be placed such that
drivers exiting Jackson Avenue will see pedestrians w alking in the crosswalk. A Do Not Enter sign
should be placed in front of the barrier to instruc t drivers not enter there. Additionally, a sign telling
drivers to enter at Mauro Street would be useful. Id eally, parents should be notified of this change
before the start of the school year to minimize con fusion when school opens. This barrier should be
FIGURE 10: COLLAPSIBLE
TEMPORARY BARRIER

11

removed at the end of the drop*off and pick*up perio
ds to allow two*way traffic on Jackson Avenue
at off*peak times.
With Jackson Avenue operating as one*way, the southe rn side of the street could be designated for
through traffic while the northern side serves as a drop*off and pick*up point for parents. This lane
use will enable through traffic to avoid the school traffic, but it will only be effective if school traffic
leaves after dropping off or picking up a child. Par ents remaining parked until their child enters the
school will prevent the queue of school traffic from advancing and defeat the purpose of the two
lanes. Lane separation may be accomplished with con es.
LONG/TERM
Setting up and breaking down the signage required for a one*way Jackson Avenue everyday may
become too burdensome for school staff, and a perma nent one*way Jackson Avenue could be
implemented. Simple “Do Not Enter” LED signs may be activated during peak periods, or a more
permanent restriping of the roadway with curb bulb outs at the exit onto Sagamore Street may be
appropriate. This change could have effects beyond s chool operations and an engineering study
would be required to determine costs and benefits a ssociated with making Jackson Avenue one*way.
4 . 2 | S H O R T E N C R O S S I N G D I S T A N C E S A T J A C K S O N A N D S A G A M O R E
SHORT/TERM
A barrier at the entrance to Jackson will allow pedestrians to cross half of Jackson Avenue before
they are in conflict with vehicles, which will reduc e crossing times at the most utilized crosswalk of
the intersection. Shortened crossing times in conju nction with modified crossing guard procedures
that allow non*conflicting traffic to proceed (see below) will significantly reduce congestion at the
Sagamore*Jackson intersection.
The north crossing on Sagamore Street is the longes t at the intersections and is heavily utilized
during pick*up. Shortening that crossing distance i s also desirable, but the offset intersection
provides no short*term mean
for doing so. Any attempt to
square off the intersection by
reducing the radius of the
northeast corner would likely
restrict vehicles turning
westbound*right out of
Jackson Avenue.
LONG/TERM
Bulb*outs on the northeast
and northwest corners of the
intersection would significantly
reduce the crossing distance,
illustrated in Figure 11. The
FIGURE 11: LONG/TERM CROSSING DISTANCE
REDUCTION

Final Report Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Jackson Heights Elementary School Transportation study

12 October 3, 2014

northeast corner currently consists of a wide turn that causes the two longest crossing distances at
the intersection. Extending the sidewalk into the i ntersections also allows parents and children to
congregate on the corner without blocking sidewalk traffic. Finally, this layout reduces the amount of
lane width available to vehicles, which will have a tr affic calming effect. However, this layout will also
likely restrict commercial truck and fire truck man euverability to turn in some directions and an
engineering study will be required to determine the most appropriate design.
Combined with a permanent one*way circulation of Ja ckson Avenue, a bulb out on the southeast
corner of the intersection could further reduce the crossing distance.
4 . 3 | M O D I F Y C R O S S I N G G U A R D P R O C E D U R E S
The current procedure of stopping all traffic when a pedestrian comes to a crosswalk would provide
maximum safety to the pedestrian if drivers consiste ntly followed the crossing guard’s directions.
However, there is potential for unforeseen vehicle*pe destrian conflicts when a driver fails to yield to
the crossing guard. It also creates extra delay for vehicles and contributes to driver frustration. An
alternative method of crossing pedestrians that woul d help alleviate some congestion without
compromising pedestrian safety is outlined below.
Typically, at a four*way stop controlled intersection, drivers will take turns proceeding
through the intersection based on the order of
arrival. Pedestrians could be crossed in a way
that minimizes conflict with vehicle procession
order. For example, if a northbound through
movement is about to proceed through the
intersection, the guard could choose to cross
pedestrians on Jackson Avenue (north*south)
but hold pedestrians on Sagamore Street (east*
west). Alternatively, the guard could choose to stop all traffic if she feels that is warranted in
particular situation.
When crossing pedestrians along a single leg, the g uard should stand in the middle of the crosswalk
with her “STOP” paddle raised when pedestrians are crossing. This will provide an additional visual
clue to drivers that pedestrians are present. Standi ng on the crosswalk that is currently being utilized
will allow other movements to proceed normally. Pede strians should only cross when directed to do
so by the crossing guard. The guard will need to mo ve around the intersection at times to be in the
correct place as pedestrians approach.
An important additional step will be to reeducate s tudents and parents to pay attention to the
crossing guard’s directions. Currently, pedestrians do not need to wait when they approach the
intersection. They will need to learn to watch the guard and wait for a signal to cross. It may be best
to start this new option at the beginning of the sc hool year so that reeducation is not attempting to
overcome any ingrained habits. The school should sen d a letter to parents alerting them of this
change in the summer and again close to the start o f the school year.
FIGURE 12: CROSSING GUARD IN CROSSWALK

13

Further details about crossing procedures may be fo
und in the Safe Routes to School “Crossing
Guard Guidelines” and the AAA “School Safety Patrol Operations Manual” in the Appendix.
4 . 4 | R E D U C E P A R E N T S P A R K I N G O N J A C K S O N A V E N U E A T P E A K T I M E S
Much of the congestion along Jackson Avenue results from parents remaining parked until their child
enters the school building. The school policy of no t being responsible for the students until they are
inside while allowing parents to drop off their chi ldren before the school is open creates a
responsibility for parents to remain in view of thei r children and therefore parked until 8:20. There
are two approaches to addressing this issue: provide more parking by either spreading the staging
area out or by building an off*site lot, or changin g the school policy to receive the children as they
arrive prior to 8:20.
SPREAD OUT THE STAGING AREAS
Currently, two grades utilize entrance C to the bui lding, and three grades utilize entrance A, leaving
an unused entrance at B. It is suggested that Secon d Grade stage may use this entrance, spreading out
the drop*off and pick*up staging areas along Sagamo re Street, which has been noted as having excess
capacity.
DESIGNATE A SUPERVISED STAGING AREA FOR BEFORE SCHO OL OPENS
If the school could modify the policy on student arrival and accept children prior to the school day,
parents would not need to remain parked. Children c ould enter the school at their current entrances
and proceed to the back recess area, or wait inside during inclement weather events in the cafeteria or
gymnasium.
In the long*term, the school could build a new park ing lot on the northern edge of the property and
use this as new drop*off area. Illustrated in Figur e 13, children would exit the vehicle in the eastern
circular turn around and drop off area. The area to the east this new circulating lot could be fenced
off, which would provide children with a safe, enclo sed area to run and play before school started.

FIGURE 13: NEW PARKING AND DROP OFF AREA NORTH OF THE SCHOOL

Final Report Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Jackson Heights Elementary School Transportation study

14 October 3, 2014

The proposed lot could also provide approximately 20 new parking spaces and provide truck access
to the rear of the school. Additional study would b e required to determine the exact dimension of the
new lot and how best to handle truck traffic.
COORDINATE SIGNING
Drop*off and pick*up locations should be clearly ma rked. Signs that disallow stopping or standing
should not be used in pick*up locations. Although s topping or standing can be interpreted as
different from dropping off or picking up, it is be st to be unambiguous with sign wording. A sign
directing vehicles to pull forwards should be instal led along Jackson Avenue to encourage drivers
pull as far forward as possible when dropping*off o r picking*up children.
4 . 5 | S N O W R E M O V A L A N D S T O R A G E P O L I C E S
Snow on Jackson Avenue shoulders reduces capacity an d can block emergency vehicle access. The
school should work with the City department respons ible for plowing to prioritize Jackson Avenue
roadway and sidewalk plowing during the school year and ensure that the street if fully cleared of
snow prior to school. Snow can be stored in the spa ces on the corner of Jackson Avenue and Mauro
Street.
4 . 6 | E X P A N D A C T I V E T R A N S P O R T A T I O N T O / F R O M S C H O O L
Increasing the number of students that utilize active transportation such as walking or biking as their
primary transportation method to school will decrea se the number of vehicles accessing the campus,
thereby reducing congestion and queuing. Additional benefits to active commuting include:
· Increased levels of physical activity,
· Improved alertness,
· Heightened self*image and independence,
· Contribution to healthy social and emotional develop ment, and
· Increased likelihood of future active lifestyles.
As witnessed during the site visit, Jackson Heights already has a significant number of students and
parents that walk to school. To increase the mode s hare of active transportation, the following
actions are recommended:
· Close any remaining sidewalk gaps, particularly alo ng Mauro Avenue.
· Develop a Safe Route to School plan to ensure that s afe pedestrian routes exist and are
maintained. Share the plan with parents to encourag e them to use safe routes.
· Educate parents on the health, lifestyle, and educa tional benefits of biking and walking to
school; encourage students to walk or bike to schoo l on their own.
· Educate parents on the reality of safety risks on w alking or biking to school, and compare to
the generally higher risk of driving.
· Conduct a second “Bike Rodeo” earlier in the school year to give fourth graders a refresher
on bicycle safety, and provide additional opportunit ies for third graders to bike to school.
· Encourage the formation of “walking school busses” where a group of students walk
together. Walking school busses increase student sa fety while reducing the amount of time
required by parents. See the appendix for additiona l information on walking school busses.

15

4 . 7 | E N C O U R A G E C A R P O O L I N G
Carpooling will reduce the number of vehicles access
ing the campus and reduce the time required of
parents. The school should try to connect parents i nterested in carpooling who live close to each
other. Implementing a staging area for before schoo l starts will also allow parents of children in
different grades to share carpooling duties.
4 . 8 | S U R V E Y P A R E N T S ’ R E S I S T A N C E T O A C T I V E T R A N S P O R T A T I O N A N D
C A R P O O L I N G
The Glens Falls School District and Adirondack / Gl ens Falls Transportation Council conducted
studies at Abraham Wing Elementary School and Big C ross Elementary School in 2006 and 2008 to
understand barriers to active transportation modes. A survey of parents’ attitudes will help the school
respond directly to parents’ concerns and stimulate conversation between parents.

Final Report Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Jackson Heights Elementary School Transportation study

16 October 3, 2014

5 . 0 I M P L E M E N T A T I O N M A T R I X
The implementation task schedule for the proposed mitigation strategies follows below:
5 . 1 | S H O R T / T E R M I M P R O V E M E N T S
Proposal Description and Responsible Party (RP) App roximate Cost
One*Way Jackson Avenue Set up temporary barrier and signage at the
entrance to Jackson Avenue
RP: School District $2,000 for
equipment; daily staff
maintenance
Shorten Crossing Distances Use the temporary barrie
r
RP: School District, Grossing Guard Accomplished with
one*way Jackson Ave

Modify Crossing Guard
Procedures Minimize the conflict between vehicles and
crossing pedestrians
RP: School District, Grossing Guard, Glens
Falls Police Department Police Department
training
Coordinate Signing Update signing to have unified me
ssage
RP: School District, DPW $200 / sign,
total of $2,000
Spread Out Morning
Staging Area
Line up second graders at entrance C
RP: School District Minimal; notice to
parents
Designate Supervised
Staging Area
Allow students to wait in gym, cafeteria, or
classroom rather than outside in the morning
RP: School District, PTA Varies depending on
available staff
resources and
contracts
Snow Removal and Storage Designate a snow storage ar ea and completely
plow Jackson Avenue
RP: DPW, School District None additional;
snow removal
currently occurs
Expand Active
Transportation Develop Safe Routes to Schools Plan, Form
walking school busses
RP: School District, PTA Minimal; educational
/ promotional
materials
Encourage Carpooling Develop a portal to connect par
ents
interested in carpooling
RP: School District, PTA, DPW Minimal; educational
/ promotional
materials

17

5 . 2 | L O N G / T E R M I M P R O V E M E N T S
Proposal Description and Responsible Party (RP) App
roximate Cost
One*Way Jackson Avenue
and / or Shorten Crossing
Distances Perform engineering study, neck down
Jackson Avenue exit with bulb*outs
RP: DPW $60,000 – 75,000
Designate Supervised
Staging Area / North
Parking Lot
Install a new parking area north of school,
fence off staging area
RP: DPW, School District, PTA $500,000 * $600,000
Expand Active
Transportation Develop Safe Routes to Schools Plan, Form
walking school busses
RP: School District, PTA Minimal; educational
/ promotional
materials
Encourage Carpooling Develop a portal to connect par
ents
interested in carpooling
RP: School District, PTA, DPW Minimal; educational
/ promotional
materials
Survey Parents Determine the resistances to active
transportation
RP: School District Varies depending on
complexity of survey;
school could
administer for
minimal funds

5 . 3 | R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S
Of the short*term proposals, all of them can be imp lemented immediately in the 2014 – 2015 school
year and will likely improve congestion and safety. Some of the proposals, such as temporary, one*
way closure of Jackson Avenue, may be best approache d as a short term pilot study with parental
feedback. Others, such as encouraging greater active transportation, conducting a bike rodeo earlier
in the school year, and moving the Second Grade entr ance, can be implemented immediately.
The long*term proposals are also all valid recommend ations. The behavioral surveys and
programmatic modifications to encourage greater wal king and biking should be pursued given their
relatively low initial cost. The bulb*outs and reduc ed crossing distance at the Jackson*Sagamore
intersection will yield the greatest improvement in pedestrian safety and congestion mitigation. As
part of a comprehensive strategy to encourage walkin g and biking, it is recommended that the School
District and City of Glens Falls collaborate with t he A/GFTC to seek funding for the reduced
crossing widths at the Jackson*Sagamore intersectio n, perhaps in conjunction with new sidewalk
construction along Mauro Avenue.

A P P E N D I X A . S A F E R O U T E S T O S C H O O L : C R O S S I N G
G U A R D G U I D E L I N E S

Adult School
Crossing Guard Guidelines
Prepared by the National Center for Safe Routes to School and the Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center, both part of the
University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center, with funding from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Safe Routes
National Center for Safe Routes to School

Safely Crossing the Street � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 1
Role of the Adult School Crossing Guard
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 2
Elements of a Crossing Guard Program
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 3
Identifying the Locations Where Adult School Crossing Guards are Needed
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 3
Hiring and Training Adult School Crossing Guards
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 6
Uniform and Equipment for Adult School Crossing Guards
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 7
Funding the Adult School Crossing Guard Program
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 8
Crossing Procedures for a Variety of Situations
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 9
An Unsignalized Crosswalk
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 10
A Signalized Crosswalk
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 11
When Two or More Adult School Crossing Guards are Needed
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 12
When an Emergency Situation Arises
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 13
Resources
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 14
Table of Contents

Safely Crossing the Street
Adult School Crossing Guard Guidelines v 1
Adult school crossing guards play an important role in
the lives of children who walk or bicycle to school � They
help children safely cross the street at key locations � They
also remind drivers of the presence of pedestrians � The
presence of adult crossing guards can lead to more parents
feeling comfortable about their children walking or bicy –
cling to school� While the primar y role of an adult school
crossing guard is to guide children safely across the street,
children also remain responsible for their own safety � In
this manner, a guard plays another key function–a role
model helping children develop the skills necessar y to
cross streets safely at all times�
The design and implementation of an adult school
crossing guard program is largely the decision of local
communities� Some federal guidance exists and there
are some state and local requirements pertaining to the
operation of guard programs, but these var y across the
countr y � State or local law enforcement, education or
transportation agencies can provide infor mation on
state and local requirements �
Ideally, the development of an adult school crossing
guard program should involve a communit y partnership
that includes the expertise of law enforcement agencies,
traf fic engineer ing or planning departments and school
systems� Working together with parents, this lead orga-
nization or group identifies the locations where adult
school crossing guards are needed and the appropr iate
number of guards for each location � The group estab-
lishes crossing procedures for a variety of traffic situa –
tions as well as hires, trains and equips the guards and
secures long-term funding for the program �
This document describes federal standards and recom –
mendations for adult school crossing guard practices and
provides examples of how some states and communities
address these issues �
The presence of adult crossing
guards can lead to more
parents feeling comfortable
about their children walking
or bicycling to school.

Adult School Crossing Guard Guidelines v 2
The Role of the Adult School Crossing Guard
The primar y responsibility of an adult school crossing
guard is to help children safely cross the street as they
walk or bicycle to and from school �
A well-trained adult school crossing guard can help to ac –
complish the following goals:
• Discourage children from behaving unsafely near
traffic, such as darting into the street without look –
ing or crossing against a traffic signal� A guard can
encourage safe behavior by all pedestrians at the
school crossing�
• Use existing gaps in traffic to help students cross
safely� When the natural traffic flow does not allow
enough time for children to safely cross a street, a
guard may need to create gaps by stopping traffic
temporarily � The guard stops traffic with hand sig-
nals or a STOP paddle, then verbally directs chil –
dren to cross the street� A guard is always the first
person in the street and the last person out of the
street�
• Alert motorists that pedestrians are in the process of
using the school crossing �
• Observe and report any incidents or conditions that
present a potential safety hazard to the school chil –
dren or the guard�
An adult school crossing guard should not direct traffic
unless specifically trained as a traffic control officer �
Wilmington, DE
Ad u lt S c h o o l C r o s s i n g G u a r d s a r e Eye s
on the Street for:
• Unsafe driver behaviors
• Unsafe pedestrian behaviors
• Unlawful parking
• Construction interfering with safe crossing
• Unsafe street conditions
• Damaged signs
• Poor visibility
• Suspicious activity
• Improper or lack of safety belt or bicycle hel-
met use

Adult School Crossing Guard Guidelines v 3
Elements of an Adult School Crossing
Guard Program
Bringing together the right members of the community
is the first step in creating a successful adult school cross –
ing guard program� The school administration, teachers,
local traffic engineers, law enforcement officers and par –
ents are among the partners that bring information and
expertise to the process and make the steps in setting up
an adult school crossing guard program an easier process
to manage � A local committee consisting of this group
along with other interested members of the community
should be established to oversee an adult school crossing
guard program �
The adult school crossing guard lead organization is re –
sponsible for:
• identifying locations where guards are needed, the
number of guards and proper signage for each loca –
tion, and the time period for crossings;
• hiring and training guards in their responsibilities;
• providing uniforms and equipment to help guards
effectively perform their duties; and
• securing funds to manage the program.
Brichta Elementary School, Tucson, AZ
MUTCD Provides National Guidance
The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
2003 (MUTCD) contains national standards for the
installation and maintenance of traffic control de-
vices and is published by the Federal Highway Ad-
ministration under the Code of Federal Regulation.
Some MUTCD statements are considered manda-
tory, while others are recommended practices, per-
missive practices, or simply statements of support.
Part 7 of the MUTCD addresses Traffic Controls for
School Areas (See Resources)

Adult School Crossing Guard Guidelines v 4
Identifying the Locations Where Adult School Crossing Guards are Needed
No absolute national criteria exist for identifying which street crossings in a community require an adult school
crossing guard. The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) provides some general federal guidance
on how to determine the need for a guard at a particular location � Some states and local governments provide fur-
ther guidance or recommendations, but the conditions under which a guard is assigned to a particular location var y
around the countr y � The local lead organization decides the selection criteria by which adult school crossing guards
are assigned to crossings � Location decisions reflect relevant federal, state and local policies and funding issues, and are
tailored to the individual conditions and needs of a community �
T he loca l lead org a n i z at ion ident i fie s locat ion s for g u a rd s
by establishing criteria and gathering information to help
them determine the need� Adult school crossing guards
shou ld be a ssig ned to school crossi ng s on ly a f ter the need
is established� Consistently applied local cr iter ia al low a
community to provide guard service where schools need
them the most � No set of guidelines, however, can cover
all the unique conditions that may exist � There are times
when traffic engineering judgment is needed to deter –
m ine when and where an adult school crossing g uard
should be used �
Information to consider when identifying guard placement
includes:
The age of the students who are crossing.
General ly, younger children need more assistance than older
children because they have a more difficult time judging
the speed and distance of approaching vehicles and may be
tempted to cross during an unsafe gap �
The width of the street and the number of lanes of
traffic students must cross.
Wide streets with multiple lanes of traffic typically require
the use of two or more adult school crossing guards �
The sight distance at the crossing.
These conditions are measured from the student’s and driv –
er’s perspectives and for actual vehicle operating speeds� Sight distance can be affected by temporar y obstructions,
such as parked vehicles and piled snow near the crossing�
Safe gaps in traffic.
Are the gaps long enough and frequent enough to allow safe crossing opportunities? The ITE “School Trip Safet y
Program Guidelines” (See Resources) states that on the average, at least one adequate gap should occur each minute
to allow for children to cross without undue delay or risk � However, other factors, such as volume of child pedestri-
ans or pedestrian groups should also be considered when determining the need for adult school crossing guards or
Defining “A Safe Gap in Traffic”
The MUTCD 2003 Section 7E.02 states that adult
school crossing guards “may be used to provide
gaps in traffic at a school crossing where an engi-
neering study has shown that adequate gaps need
to be created and where authorized by law.” An
acceptable gap may be defined as the minimum
time between vehicles that 85 percent of all groups
of pedestrians waiting to cross a street will accept
as adequate to cross the street, according to the
Institute of Transportation Engineer’s “School Trip
Safety Program Guidelines.”
If there is at least one safe gap per minute of cross-
ing time, there may be no need for any special traf-
fic controls. If, however, there is not at least one
safe gap per minute, officials should consider using
an adult crossing guard or traffic signal to create
safe gaps.
In practice, this analysis is time-consuming to cal-
culate and may discourage agencies from attempt-
ing such an evaluation. Traffic speed, width of the
street and the age of the children are also important
considerations in determining if a crossing location
will benefit from an adult school crossing guard.

Adult School Crossing Guard Guidelines v 5
other traffic control� If traffic volumes during crossing hours do not correspond to enough safe gaps, some method
to interrupt traffic should be considered, such as a crossing guard or traffic signal �
Presence of traffic control devices, including traffic
signals, signs and pavement.
If present, are the traffic controls sufficient? For example, a
signalized intersection at a school crossing location should
h ave WA L K / D ON ’ T WA L K s i g n a l s , a n d a p e d e s t r i a n pu s h
button may also be appropriate � Guards and students should
be properly trained on traffic signals relative to safe street
crossings�
The speed of vehicles at the crossing.
Vehicles that travel faster require greater stopping distanc –
es, and younger children have more difficulty than adults
judging the speed of a fast-approaching vehicle �
Volumes of traffic and pedestrians.
Local transportation planning or engineering departments
can provide or help collect these data� Vehicle counts may
be readily available, but pedestrian counts will likely need
to be made during this process� The number of students
California Criteria for the Placement
of Adult School Crossing Guards
The State of California provides criteria for the place-
ment of adult school crossing guards in the MUTCD
2003, California Supplement. Adult school cross-
ing guards normally are assigned where at least 40
school pedestrians over the course of two hours each
day cross a public highway on the way to or from
school. Guards also should be considered when spe-
cial situations make it necessary to assist elementary
school pedestrians in crossing the street.
In some cases, a change in the school crossing loca-
tion is underway, but prevailing conditions require
crossing supervision until the change is completed,
so a guard should be considered. Additional criteria
are provided for specific situations, including un-
controlled crossings, stop sign-controlled crossings
and traffic signal-controlled crossings. The criteria
are based on vehicular traffic volume, vehicle speed
and the number of vehicular turning movements.
Arizona Requirements for the Placement
of Adult School Crossing Guards
Arizona State Law (ARS Section 28-797-D) man-
dates an adult school crossing guard at a yellow
15 mph school crosswalk if the school crosswalk
is not adjacent to the school site. These guards are
employed by the school district. Adult school cross-
ing guards are recommended, but not required, by
state law at 15 mph school zone crossings that are
adjacent to the school site. These guards may be
either employed by the school district or be vol-
unteers, who have been trained and approved by
the school district. (Traffic Safety for School Areas
Guidelines, ADOT)
The City of Phoenix requires adult school crossing
guards for elementary school crossings on busy col-
lector streets and arterial streets. In some cases, two
guards may be recommended. At white-painted
crosswalks and signalized crossings, guards can be
recommended using a method based on observa-
tion and engineering judgment using specific criteria
such as street classification and the age of students.
Pedestrian Signal Heads
Pedestrian signal heads provide information to con-
trol pedestrian traffic. Chapter 4E of the MUTCD
lists the meaning of pedestrian signal indicators.
A steady WALK (walking person) signal means
that a pedestrian facing the signal may start to
cross the street. A flashing DON’T WALK (upraised
hand) signal means that a pedestrian shall not start
to cross the street, but that any pedestrian who
has started to cross shall finish crossing. A steady
DON’T WALK (upraised hand) signal means that a
pedestrian shall not enter the street.

Adult School Crossing Guard Guidelines v 6
currently using pedestrian facilities as well as the projected pedestrian demand based on school demographics should
be determined�
The attendance boundary and walk zone for each school.
The distances that walk zones extend from schools as well as policies regarding the provision of bus service differ
among states and communities � Both can impact the number of children walking to school and the routes they take �
The distance the crossing is from a school and the type of adjacent land use.
A crossing in close prox im it y to a school w ithin a residentia l neighborhood may attract more student pedestr ians than,
for example, a crossing located further from a school surrounded by non-residential land uses �
Crash history of the crossing.
The number, type and time of day that each crash occurs at a specific location should be recorded and analyzed �
Hiring and Training Adult School Crossing Guards
The hiring, training, supervising and funding of adult
school crossing guards is typically the responsibility of lo-
cal law enforcement agencies, traffic engineering depart –
ments, individual schools or school districts�
An adult school crossing guard can be a paid employee or
a volunteer member of the community� Paid employees
may be preferred because an employer has the ability to
train, evaluate and discipline an employee � Ever y prospec-
t ive g u a r d s hou ld u nd e r g o a b a s ic phy s ic a l e x a m i n a t ion a nd
cr im inal background check � A guard should have good vi-
sion, hearing and mobility, be able to stand for long periods
of time outdoors and to communicate well with others �
It is critical that a guard can communicate clearly with
the children he or she supervises at the crossing� If a guard
cannot adequately read or understand English, training
materials must be provided in a language in which the
guard is proficient� Ideally, a guard should have good Eng-
lish language skills �

Adu lt school crossi ng g ua rd t r a i n i ng is a n essent ia l step to
help insure that the guard is performing properly � Train-
ing should be extended to substitute guards as well as
those who supervise the crossing guards � Training meth-
ods include both classroom instruction and field exercises
and should address:
• The basic traffic laws of the community.
• School zone signage and pavement markings.
Training in Florida
The State of Florida’s Department of Transportation
has developed uniform training guidelines, and each
local government in Florida that administers a school
crossing guard program is required to provide training
for its guards according to the guidelines. For more
information visit http://www.dot.state.fl.us /safety /
ped_bike /brochures /pdf/SCG%20Training%20
Guidelines2009.pdf
Training in North Carolina
According to the office of the North Carolina At-
to r n ey G e n e ral, s ch o o l cro s sing guards may b e co n-
sidered traffic control officers when proper train-
ing is provided as specified in North Carolina GS
20-114.1, the law that addresses the training and
appointment of traffic control officers. In 1998,
The Nor th Carolina Depar tment of Transpor tation’s
Division of Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation
developed a program to train the local law enforce-
ment officers who are responsible for training adult
school crossing guards in their jurisdictions.

Adult School Crossing Guard Guidelines v 7
• Proper use and purpose of traffic signs and signals.
• Methods of signaling drivers and taking advantage of traffic gaps.
• Crossing procedures and ways to teach them to children.
• Site-specific traffic factors and potential traffic hazards.
• Professional work responsibilities, including agency rules and regulations, who the guard’s supervisor is, the
proper chain of command and legal aspects of the job �
• Proper attire and behavior to remain safe and to project a positive public image. For example, while on the job, a
guard should not wear clothing that is in poor taste or that promotes alcohol, tobacco or similar products � Also,
a guard should not carr y or use tobacco products or use foul language� Adult school crossing guards project a
positive public image and serve as a role model for children. (For more information see Uniforms and Equip-
ment)
• Proper use of safety equipment.
• The safety issues and limitations of children as pedestrians.
• Procedures for crashes involving adult school crossing guards and children on their way to or from school.
• Emergency procedures. (For specific information see When an emergency situation arises under Crossing pro-
cedures)
• Protecting the health and welfare of the guard while working, including topics such as proper attire to increase vis-
ibility, the need for hydration, sun protection, bee sting treatment and how to respond to threats from loose dogs �
Uniforms and Equipment for Adult
School Crossing Guards
An adult school crossing guard wears a uniform and uses
equipment that is highly visible and easily identifiable by
the general public� This enhanced visibility allows motor-
ists and pedestrians to see the guard and the signal the
guard presents more clearly �
The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
(MUTCD) recommends that an adult school crossing
guard be uniformed so that street users and pedestrians can
recognize the guard and respond to the guards’ signals � The
guard uniform should be distinctively different from those
worn by regular law enforcement officers � Adult school
crossing guards should wear retro-reflective traffic vests �
The MUTCD provides guidelines for such high-visibility
retro-reflective safety apparel to be worn by guards �
The MUTCD recommends that a guard use a STOP pad-
dle as the primary hand-signaling device � States and local governments address hand-signaling devices in a variety of
ways � Some jurisdictions require the use of a STOP paddle, others recommend its use, and yet others recommend its use
in conjunction with hand-signals. If a STOP paddle is used, the MUTCD sets guidelines on the shape, size and design
National Stop Paddle Requirements
The MUTCD only recommends the use of a STOP
paddle. If a paddle is used, the following standard
applies.
The MUTCD states: “The STOP paddle shall be an
octagonal shape. The background of the STOP
face shall be red with at least 150 mm (6 in) capi-
tal white letters and border. The paddle shall be
at least 450 mm (18 in) in size and have the word
message STOP on both sides. The paddle shall
be retro-reflectorized or illuminated when used
during hours of darkness.” Finally, the MUTCD
provides options for modifications to the STOP
paddle, including the addition of flashing lights,
to improve its visibility.

Adult School Crossing Guard Guidelines v 8
of the paddle�Other potential pieces of guard equipment
include gloves, a hat and a whistle � Wearing a hat gives a
guard a more official appearance and can enhance his or
her visibility, as well as protect the guard from the sun,
cold, and rain� Whistles may help a guard gain the atten-
tion of children at noisy intersections �
If a guard is equipped with two-way radios or cell phones,
they must be used only in emergencies � A guard should
never answer the phone or radio while crossing children �
In fact, some agencies prohibit cell phones to avoid dis-
tractions�
As the local committee identifies what type of equipment
to use, it should also decide on guidelines that will explain
when equipment is considered unsuitable for use� For exam-
ple, a guard should not use old, defaced or worn out STOP
paddles or safety vests that are no longer reflective or that
have faded �
Funding the Adult School Crossing
Guard Program
Stable and sufficient funding is important to the effective
operation of any adult school crossing guard program �
Across the nation, a variety of sources have been used�
Communities have obtained financial resources through
taxes, local school boards, sheriff, police, public works and
traffic engineering departments, and through surcharges
on parking fines� Public and private organizations as well
as Parent-Teacher Associations or Organizations also have
contributed funding for guard programs �
Estes Hills Elementary School, Chapel Hill, NC
Photo by Paul Kendall
State Variations on Stop Paddle
Requirements and Uniforms
The MUTCD 2003 California Supplement requires
the STOP paddle to be the primary hand-signaling
device and allows for the use of a larger paddle
where speeds are 30 mph or more and guards
need greater visibility.
The State of Florida requires an adult school cross-
ing guard to wear a high-visibility, retroreflective
outer garment (vest, shirt, or rainwear) that is la-
beled as ANSI 107-2004 standard performance
for Class 2 risk exposure. The apparel background
material shall be either fluorescent yellow green or
fluorescent orange-red. A guard shall be equipped
with a whistle, as well as a STOP Paddle that is
MUTCD compliant and /or orange or yellow-green
gloves that include retroreflective material. (If both
gloves and stop paddle are used, the gloves need
not include retroreflective material.)
The State of North Carolina strongly recommends
the use of hand-held signs or STOP paddles, but al-
lows the local governing agency to decide whether
a guard uses either a STOP paddle or an orange-
gloved hand, or both.

Adult School Crossing Guard Guidelines v 9
Crossing Procedures for a Variety of Situations
Recommended procedures are described below for an adult school crossing guard to follow when crossing chil-
dren in a variety of traffic situations� The information was compiled from the Arizona Handbook for Adult School
Crossing Guards, the Florida School Crossing Guard Training Guidelines and the North Carolina School Crossing
Guard Program: Training Manual (See Resources at end of this document for further information.)
Procedures are described for guards in situations at un –
signalized crosswalks and signalized crosswalks, when
two or more adult school crossing guards are needed, and
when an emergency arises � Some intersection configura-
tions, including T-intersections, roundabouts or free-flow
right turn lanes, require that the local committee consider
these unique situations when establishing the procedure
for crossing children �
In ever y situation, a guard uses the proper search pattern
for crossing a street and encourages student pedestrians to
follow these safety steps � This pattern is:
1� Stop at the curb or edge of the street �
2� Look left, right, then left again for traffic�
3� Look over the shoulder for possible turning vehicles if the pedestrian is standing at an intersection �
4� Walk directly across the street at a consistent pace and continue scanning the street while crossing the street �
For stopping motorists, the MUTCD recommends that an adult school crossing guard use a STOP paddle as the pri-
mar y hand-signaling device � However, many jurisdictions around the countr y allow guards to use clearly delivered
hand signals, alone or in conjunction with the STOP paddle, to alert traffic to activity at school crossings � The proper
hand signal for a guard to alert and stop traffic requires a guard to raise his or her arm forward and toward traffic,
and parallel to the ground with the palm and fingers flexed upward� The use of hand signals requires a higher level
of training than the use of STOP paddles, and guards using hand signals will benefit from wearing white or bright
orange gloves to attract drivers’ attention�
State Street School, Windsor, V T

Adult School Crossing Guard Guidelines v 10
An Unsignalized Crosswalk
At unsignalized crosswalks, it is the responsibility of the
crossing guard to determine when children cross based on
gaps in traffic flow� A guard who is assigned to an unsig-
nalized crosswalk on an undivided street should:
• Stand near the curb or edge of the street, on the side
from which children are approaching�
• Stop children a safe distance back from the curb or
edge of the street, or behind a “stand-back” line (see
bottom photo). Instruct children to cross only on the
guard’s signal �
• Teach children who approach a crossing on a bicycle,
scooter, or skateboard to dismount and push the bi –
cycle or scooter or carr y the skateboard across the
street as a pedestrian �
• A guard enters the street in the following sequence:
1� Wait for a gap in traffic on the guard’s side of the
street�
2� Face the closest oncoming traffic and make eye
contact with the approaching drivers�
3� Walk to the center of street with the STOP pad-
dle held high� If not using a STOP paddle, walk
to the center of the street with an arm raised to –
ward traffic and parallel to the ground with the
palm and fingers extended upward�
4� Where there are more than two lanes, enter the
street and alert the traffic one lane at a time �
5� Face opposite approaching traffic and make eye contact with those drivers�
6� Stand on the crosswalk line close to the center of the street and make sure that all traffic has stopped, including
any turning vehicles�
7� Face the intersection�
8� Verbally instruct the children to cross and tell them to look left-right-left while crossing and proceed across
the street within the marked crosswalk�
9. Do not allow any cars to cross the crosswalk until all the students have crossed.
10� Remain in the center of the street until the last child reaches the opposite side of the street�
11� Walk to the curb or edge of the street with the STOP paddle and/or stop-arm held high the entire way � When
back at the curb or edge of the street, lower hand(s) and allow traffic to flow again.
12� Remain near the curb or edge of the street for the next group of children to assemble �
Photo by Dan Burden

Adult School Crossing Guard Guidelines v 11
A Signalized Crosswalk
A variety of traffic and pedestrian signals are found at
signalized crosswalks including traffic signals with stan-
dard pedestrian signal heads and, in some locations, traf –
fic signals with pedestrian countdown signals which show
pedestrians how much crossing time remains � Signalized
crosswalks may also have pedestrian pushbuttons which
are electronic buttons used by pedestrians to change the
traffic signal timing� An adult school crossing guard should
be trained in the proper use of the signal at the crossing
where he or she will work �
In general, a guard stands in the center of the street while
students cross the crosswalk � If the signal’s timing is too
short to allow this approach, however, the local committee
should take steps to remedy the situation � For example, more guards could be assigned to the crosswalk, more time
could be added to the signal or the guard could escort the students across the entire street and return to his or her
original starting position on the next signal cycle � If a guard escorts students across the entire street, the guard must
instruct the other children to wait until he or she returns before crossing �
A guard who is assigned to signalized crosswalks has this sequence to follow:
• Stand on the side of the street from which children are approaching. If there is a pedestrian push button, push
the button for a WALK signal �
• Group children a safe distance from the curb or edge of the street or behind the “stand-back” line. Instruct
children to cross only at the guard’s signal �
• Teach children who approach a crossing on a bicycle, scooter, or skateboard to dismount and push the bicycle or
scooter or carr y the skateboard across the street as a pedestrian �
• Enter the street in this sequence:
1� Enter the street only with a WALK signal, and the STOP paddle or stop-arm held high� Stand on the crosswalk
line closest to the intersection�
2� Face oncoming traffic and make eye contact with drivers who are attempting to turn�
3. Verbally instruct the students to begin their search (left, right, left and over their shoulders, for turning traffic)
and cross when safe �
4. Tell the students to continue walking if the signal changes to flashing “DON’T WALK”, but do not allow chil-
dren to start crossing at this time. Help students learn that a flashing “DON’T WALK” signal means Don’t Start.
5� Wait for children to reach the opposite side of the street�
6� Return to the curb or edge of the street with your STOP paddle or stop-arm held high� After reaching the
curb or edge of the street, a guard can lower his or her hand(s) and allow traffic to flow again.

Adult School Crossing Guard Guidelines v 12
When Two or More Adult School
Crossing Guards are Needed
For signalized or unsignalized crossings with four or
more lanes, experts recommend using two adult school
crossing guards working in unison, with one guard posi –
t ione d on e a ch s id e of t he st re et� E a ch g u a rd st a nd s on t he
crosswalk line closest to the approaching traf fic for his or
her half of the street and between the approaching traffic
and the students �
A team of two or more guards should be assigned to school
crossings at divided streets to help children cross safely �
One guard stops one stream of traffic while the other guard
stops traffic in the opposite lanes� In order to coordinate
signaling, the guard on the side of the street from which
children are approaching makes the decisions, with the
second guard taking his or her cues from the first guard �
Guards should not cross students during the protected left
turn signal when the DON’T WALK signal flashes and
ensure that all right-turning vehicles yield while students
are crossing �
More than two guards may also be needed at an intersec –
tion of two major arterial streets where children must cross
two or more legs of the intersection �
Photo by Dan Burden
Red octagons represent adult school crossing guard loca-
tion on a multi-lane road.

Adult School Crossing Guard Guidelines v 13
When an Emergency Situation Arises
During a guard’s duty, emergency situations, such as a sudden illness or an injur y due to a crash, may occur near the
school crossing � In the case of an emergency, a guard must stay at his or her post, keep control of the situation, and
use the following basic procedure to ensure the children’s safety:
1� Stop crossing the children �
2� Group the children away from the street to maintain
control �
3� Remain at the assigned post with the children �
4� Ask several people to call 911 �
5. Do not move the victim, unless the victim is in seri-
ous and immediate danger of being struck by another
vehicle�
6 � Use a vehicle to block the crash victim from traf-
fic, if necessar y � The vehicle should be positioned a
distance away from the victim to provide protection
from other vehicles but, if struck would not endanger
the victim or rescue workers �
7� Always notify the supervisor as soon as possible of any emergency that occurred �
When fire trucks, ambulances or other emergency vehicles approach the crossing with emergency lights and sirens in
use, the guard keeps children out of the street and a safe distance away from the crossing until the emergency vehicles
have passed�
Ideally, a guard should take a first aid short course and a CPR class offered by the Red Cross or the local Fire Depart-
ment to learn the best way to respond to an emergency situation �

Adult School Crossing Guard Guidelines v 14
Resources
• AAA video for sale Between the Lines: Adult School Crossing Guard Training. http://www.aaafoundation.org/
products/index.cfm?button=item-detail&ID =404&storeid=1 [Accessed: 08/14/06]
• Arizona Handbook for Adult School Crossing Guards, City of Phoenix (1-602-262-4659) and A A A Arizona
(602-241-2933 or 1-800-352-5382 ext. 2933).
• Florida School Crossing Guard Training Guidelines, Florida Department of Transportation, Safety Office and
the Florida School Crossing Guard Task Force, 1998 � http://www�dot �state �fl �us/safety/ped_bike/brochures/
pdf/SCG %20Training%20Guidelines2009.pdf [Accessed: 09/21/09]
• Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways, Part 7 Traffic Controls for School Areas,
U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, 2003. http://mutcd.f hwa.dot.gov/pdfs/
2003r1/Ch7.pdf [Accessed: 03/07/06]
• Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices 2003: California Supplement, State of California Business, Trans-
portation and Housing Agency, Department of Transportation, 2004. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/sign-
tech/mutcdsupp/pdf/MUTCD2003CASupp.pdf [Accessed: 03/07/06]
• North Carolina School Crossing Guard Program: Training Manual, North Carolina Department of Transporta-
tion, Division of Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation, 1999.
• School Trip Safety Program Guidelines: Recommended Practice, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1984.
(out of print)
• Traffic Safety for School Areas Guidelines, Arizona Department of Transportation, 2003. http://www.azdot.gov/
highways/Traffic/standards/School_ Safety/Schoolsafety.pdf [Accessed 03/07/06]
Prepared by the National Center for Safe Routes to School and the Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center, both part of the
University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center, with funding from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Information provided by
Florida Department of Transportation, North Carolina Department of Transportation,
Arizona Department of Transportation, Cit y of Phoenix Street Transportation Department
SafeRoutes
National Center for Safe Routes to School

Final Report Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Jackson Heights Elementary School Transportation study

A P P E N D I X B . A M E R I C A N A U T O M O B I L E A S S O C I A T I O N :
S C H O O L S A F E T Y P A T R O L O P E R A T I O N S M A N U A L

AAA SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL
OPERATIONS
MANUAL

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
1
Message from AAA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2
Overview
Role of the Safety Patrol . . . . . . . . . . . . .3
History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4
Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5
Forming Your Patrol
Partnerships
AAA role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
School role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
Parent Teacher Association role . . . . .6
Law Enforcement role . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
Community role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
Concerns
Safety of Patrols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7
“Stranger Danger” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
Securing Official School Authorization . . .9
Limiting Liability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9
Organization, Training and Operation
Selecting the Patrol Supervisor . . . . . . .10
Selecting Patrol Members . . . . . . . . . . .11
Selection of Intersections . . . . . . . . . . .12
Parental Permission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12
Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13-14
Installation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15
Officer Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16
Officer Duties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16
Length of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18
Equipment Care . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18
Daily Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19Mechanics of the Street Patrol . . . . .19
Determining the Gap . . . . . . . . . . . . .20
Record Keeping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20
Meetings
Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21
Agenda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21
Minutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22
Supervision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22
On Patrol
Role of Patrol
at Signalized Intersections . . .23
Bus Loading and Unloading . . . . . . . . .23
On the Bus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24
Car Pools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24
Reporting Dangerous Practices . . . . . . .25
Role of Police . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25
Role of Adult Crossing Guards . . . . . . .26
Supporting Your Patrol Program
School Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27
Fundraising . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27
Discipline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28
Morale Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29
Recognition Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30
Lifesaving Award Medal . . . . . . . . . .30
National Patroller of the Year . . . . . .31
Related Programs and Resources
School’s Open Drive Safely . . . . . . . . . .32
Best Route to School . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32
Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33
Top Tips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34
Table of Contents

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
2
Proud AAA tradition
AAA School Safety Patrols play an important role in helping young pedestrians learn and
fulfill responsibilities regarding traffic safety.
Millions of U.S. boys and girls have honorably served their classmates since the AAA
School Safety Patrol program was started in the early 1920s. Interest in the program has
spread around the world. At least 30 other countries, including New Zealand, the
Netherlands, England, Germany and France, have emulated the AAA School Safety Patrol
program. The experience is the same — a reduction in traffic death rates.
Boys and girls who contribute their time as AAA School Safety Patrols deserve special thanks
for their efforts. AAA recognizes the AAA School Safety Patrol program as an outstanding
school safety activity. We commend school personnel who administer the programs and law
enforcement officials who contribute to the success of programs in their communities.
For more than 75 years, AAA clubs have proudly sponsored, promoted and aided AAA
School Safety Patrol programs as a community service in the interest of safety for all
schoolchildren. AAA clubs have been the leading non-school civic agencies active in patrol
work in most communities. During its long and distinguished history, the AAA School
Safety Patrol program has provided a safer pedestrian environment and a wide spectrum
of educational opportunities for millions of children. AAA has provided the means for the
patrol to succeed.
This manual will serve as a resource to community organizations, school administrators
and supervisors who are coordinating AAA School Safety Patrol programs. The policies
and practices presented in this manual are the result of the combined efforts of several
national educational, law enforcement and safety organizations. It represents the
cumulative experience of AAA School Safety Patrol operations in every corner of the
United States.
Consistent, uniform operating procedures across the country are essential for the motorist
and pedestrian to know what to expect. For this reason, uniform AAA School Safety Patrol
identification and operating procedures are highly recommended.
Robert L. Darbelnet,
AAA President and CEO
Foreword

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
3
Role of the School Safety Patrol
AAA School Safety Patrols are school-sponsored student volunteers from upper elementary,
middle, and junior high schools.
Patrols direct children, not traffic. As school-age leaders in traffic safety, patrol members
teach other students about traffic safety on a peer-to-peer basis. They also serve as role
models for younger children who look up to them.
School Safety Patrol members:
• Complete training in traffic safety
• Protect students from the hazards of crossing roads and highways on their
way to and from school
• Assist bus drivers in safely transporting students to and from school
• Teach fellow students about traffic safety.
• Serve other leadership functions under the direction of school officials
Typically, teachers and principals appoint Patrol members, who participate with parental
approval. A teacher usually serves as patrol supervisor.
Overview

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
4
History
As members of AAA School Safety Patrols, students have protected their classmates
since 1916.
In the 1930s, three national organizations: the American Automobile Association, the
National Congress of Parents and Teachers, and the National Safety Council —
collaborated on Standard Rules for the Operation of School Boy Patrols. These guidelines
have been updated over the years to become the operating standards for AAA School
Safety Patrols.
Today, more than 50,000 schools sponsor patrols, protecting pedestrians and school bus
riders in all 50 states.
School safety patrol members have grown up to be U.S. presidents, governors, members
of Congress, Supreme Court justices, astronauts, and Olympic medalists, as well as
educators, executives, and community leaders throughout the country.
As the value of the program has gained recognition, two national awards have been
introduced. Lifesaving Awards debuted in 1945. The Patroller of the Year award was first
bestowed in 2002. For more information, please refer to pages 30-31.
Overview

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
5
Benefits
AAA School Safety Patrols benefit students, schools, and communities.
Students gain:
• Safety awareness
• Leadership
• Teamwork
• Pride
• Citizenship
• Respect for law enforcement
Schools benefit from opportunities to promote:
• Traffic safety awareness
• Peer-to-peer education
• Character-building opportunities
• A constructive outlet for students’ energy
• A positive relationship with parents, law enforcement, and the
overall community
Communities benefit from:
• Safer environments for pedestrians and motorists
• A spirit of volunteerism and civic-mindedness
• A positive collaboration between students, parents, schools, and
law enforcement
Overview

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
6
Partnerships
The most effective patrol programs come from a strong partnership between AAA,
schools, Parent Teacher Associations, law enforcement, and the community.
The role of AAA:
• Sponsorship
• Traffic Safety Education and awareness presentations
• Public outreach and recognition
• Source for resources, such as equipment
• Source of patrol guidelines
The role of the school:
• Supervisors are responsible for implementation of school safety patrols in
elementary schools within their school system.
• Principals appoint teachers to serve as patrol supervisors
• Area patrol supervisors meet to exchange best practices
The role of the Parent Teacher Association (where applicable):
• Support of the school’s patrol program, including recognition programs
• Sponsors equipment and training
• Liaison between the school and the community
The role of law enforcement:
• Advisor to the program
• Advocate on behalf of the patrol to motorists and the community
• Contribute to training and development of patrols
The role of the community:
• Civic organizations may provide recognition and community awareness
programs
• These organizations could include
– Police auxiliary
– Women’s clubs
– School booster clubs
– American Legion posts
– Other safety or civic groups
Forming Your Patrol

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
7
Concerns
Safety of Patrols
The safety of Patrols should be achieved through training on traffic safety, operation, and the
responsibilities of each post; dedicated adult supervision; and regular inspections help protect
safety patrols.
To remain safe on duty, patrol members must remain at their assigned posts and always
properly display their belts and badges.
Patrollers are trained to seek adult help in the following examples of specific traffic situations:
• Parked cars blocking the view of an intersection
• Parked cars blocking school bus stop or student loading or unloading zone
• Failure of motorists to obey traffic control device
• Suspicious activity by adult or older students
• Vehicles turning at T-intersections
• Wrong-way traffic on one-way streets
• Emergencies and injuries
• Electrical wires down near the patrol post
• Domestic or wild animal threats
• Student fights
• Emergency vehicle response near the post.
• Any situation beyond the realm of the daily operation of duties at a
patrol post
Forming Your Patrol

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
8
Concerns (continued)
“Stranger Danger”
Patrol members are trained to report problems with strangers to the patrol supervisor,
teachers, parents, and/or law enforcement. These “Stranger Danger” precautions are part
of patrol training:
Patrol members should be trained to never:
• Approach cars or allow other students to approach unknown motorists
• Accept candy or presents from strangers
• Help strangers with directions or search for a lost pet
• Allow their photos to be taken
• Divulge their name, address, phone number, or other family information
Patrol members are trained to seek immediate help if:
• They encounter someone who appears to be under the influence of drugs
or alcohol
• They become suspicious of the behavior of older students or adults
• They are followed
Patrol members learn that if they are grabbed by a stranger, they should make as much
noise as possible.
Forming Your Patrol

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
9
Securing Official School Authorization
Before school principals institute the AAA School Safety Patrol program, they must obtain
approval from the school superintendent or school board.
The approval process will vary according to community and school system requirements. In
some cases, principals may seek support for the program from community organizations.
Although most superintendents are familiar with patrols in general, they may not
understand the details of operation.
To gain support in the community and in the school system, a principal introducing a patrol
should be prepared to:
• Identify community needs
• Present the patrol’s objectives
• Explain operational requirements
• Outline available resources that will support the program
Limiting Liability
• Create a statement of purpose that outlines the objectives of a school safety patrol program
• Grant authority to principals or supervisors of safety education or transportation to
maintain safety patrols and establish rules and regulations for their supervision
• Limit the age group from which patrols may be selected and determine any exclusions
from participation, such as health concerns
• Extend the same protection to the school safety patrol, supervisors, and those involved
in the program that applies to other student volunteer programs
• Provide guidelines to ensure consistency between patrol programs so students benefit
equally from participation
• Each school should develop a policy regarding times when school safety patrollers
should not be on post due to inclement weather
Forming Your Patrol

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
10
Selecting the Patrol Supervisor
The School Safety Patrol Supervisor is a responsible adult, typically a teacher, appointed
by the school principal to oversee the patrol. More than any other individual, the School
Safety Patrol Supervisor determines the success of the program.
The ideal supervisor demonstrates:
• A strong belief in the value of the program
• Knowledge of traffic safety
• Leadership
• Organizational skills
• People skills, including the ability to share praise and constructive criticism
• Ability to inspire confidence and respect
• Dependability
• Ability to establish rapport with students, school leaders, the community,
and law enforcement
Supervisor duties include:
• Serving as the source of information on all aspects of the program
• Selecting patrol members and assigning duties
• Training all patrol members, including officers
• Supervising all patrol operations
• Conducting training sessions, reviews, and administrative meetings
• Advising all adult sponsoring committees on the patrol’s activities
Organization, Training and Operation
Determining Patrol Size
Schools should work with the traffic engineering agency in their area to make the proper
determinations regarding the number of patrols that should be assigned at various
intersections. A traffic specialist can provide traffic data, conduct traffic studies, evaluate
information about the school and help to implement safety procedures for students
walking to and from school. The analysis can be used to plan school safety patrol posts
where they can operate satsifactorily, keeping in mind the age and developmental nature
of Patrol membership. Busy crossings require more than one Patrol member. Occasionally
it will be found best NOT to use the same crossing place to-school pupil traffic as is used
for from-school traffic, because of changes in traffic volumes and direction at different
times of day.

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
11
Selecting Patrol Members
AAA encourages the formation of a patrol force that is just large enough to fulfill the needs
of the school. Coordination is much easier with a smaller group. After determining the
optimum size of the patrol a school needs, choose members based on demonstrated:
• Leadership
• Maturity
• Reliability
• Ability to follow rules
• Punctuality
• Health (or ability to perform duties)
• Interest in traffic safety
• Sound judgment
• Good attendance record
• Courtesy
• Respect for classmates and others
• Desire to help others
Select reserve patrol members to ensure trained patrol members are available at all times.
Organization, Training and Operation

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
12
Selection of Intersections
In selecting intersections for posts, gather recommendations from:
• School personnel
• Law enforcement
• Bus drivers
• Area businesses
• PTA officials
Review coverage annually. New roads or subdivisions and changes in bus or walking
patterns may change patrol needs.
Assign patrol posts based on:
• Intersections near the school
• The side of the street from which students approach
• Traffic direction and density
• Nearness of the post to patrol member’s home
Parental Permission
Students must have permission from parents or guardians to participate in the patrol program.
When they understand the educational value, service, and character-building aspects of
the program, most parents are proud to give their permission for participation.
AAA can provide a special consent form which explains the aims, objectives, and
operation of the AAA School Safety Patrol. This standard form also contains the
membership application and pledge taken by patrol members.
Organization, Training and Operation

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
13
Training
Thorough training is an absolute requirement. Training may take place in school or special
summer camps.
Trainers can be the Patrol Supervisor, a AAA representative, or a law enforcement officer.
When possible, train new patrol members for the upcoming year before the end of the
prior year. Schedule refresher training for both new and veteran members should be
provided before the school year begins.
Information to cover in your training:
• Fundamentals of traffic safety
• Duties of each patrol post
• Identifying sufficient gaps in traffic to allow safe crossing
• Special hazards
• Dealing with pedestrians
• School bus safety procedures
• Safety procedures on school grounds
• Maintaining records (for officers)
School training may be conducted as:
• Classes
• On-the-job personal direction
• Written guidelines and oral or written quizzes
• Joint clinics held in cooperation with other schools and involving new and
veteran members
• Viewing of training videos from the local AAA club or AAA Foundation for
Traffic Safety followed by discussion
• Diagramming a duty corner and highlighting hazards and a patrol plan for
the specific crossing
• School bus drills
Training methods can be used individually or in combination.
Because officers take on more responsibility and have more complex duties, most schools
provide additional training for incoming officers.
Some communities schedule a Patrol Member Training Camp over summer vacation. This
camp may be open to all patrol members or officers.
Organization, Training and Operation

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
14
Training (continued)
Camps are ideally scheduled just before school reopens so the training is fresh in the
minds of patrol members on the first day of school.
Camps combine traffic safety education with fun activities. Classes may be taught by law
enforcement, safety experts, and representatives from your local AAA club. Veteran patrol
members also may lead discussion sessions or conduct role-playing exercises.
Most camps end with an exam and “graduation” ceremony in which successful trainees
receive certificates, pins, and a training camp T-shirt.
Civic organizations and PTAs may cover fees for training camps.
Organization, Training and Operation

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
15
Installation
A formal installation ceremony instills pride and reinforces the importance of your patrol’s
service to the school and community.
Many schools make the installation part of a school assembly or PTA meeting. Some
schools broadcast their installation ceremony on educational or public Television. Your
school district’s information officer may help you promote your ceremony.
Consider inviting the mayor, city official, school officer, a representative from law enforcement
or AAA. Your visiting dignitary may be invited to lead the pledge and present badges.
Reciting the AAA School Safety Patrol Pledge (see appendix), or creating your own
school-specific pledge, is an easy but powerful way to create a spirit of shared
responsibility and teamwork.
AAA can provide a safety patrol ID card (see appendix) that includes the standard pledge.
These cards can be presented at installation, along with badges, belts and other equipment.
Organization, Training and Operation

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
16
Officer Selection
The Patrol Supervisor selects officers. The supervisor may do this individually or by
supervising an election by patrol members. Officers generally serve for one semester.
Typically, a patrol has a captain, lieutenant, and a sergeant. The size of the patrol unit
determines the number of officers needed. Patrol officers take on additional responsibility
and help lead activities. Officers also must be trained to substitute for any post. One of the
lieutenants becomes acting captain when the captain is not available for duty.
Encourage officers to rely upon respect and cooperation, rather than authority. Specific
officer duties are outlined later in the manual.
Officer Duties
Captains are responsible for:
• Preparing reports for the Patrol Supervisor
• Proposing the agenda for patrol meetings
• Assigning posts
• Monitoring patrol performance
• Presenting safety talks to younger classes
• Enforcing all patrol rules
• Ensuring patrol members maintain and wear belts and badges
• Arranging for substitutes as needed
• Maintaining the Captain’s Record Book
Lieutenants are responsible for:
• Acting for the captain, as assigned
• Assisting the captain in checking posts and buses
• Contributing to operational reports
• Filling in for absent patrol members
The Sergeant is responsible for:
• Acting as unit secretary
• Maintaining the patrol bulletin board
• Inventorying equipment and recommending repairs, replacements,
and acquisitions
Organization, Training and Operation

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
17
Length of Service
AAA recommends that schools appoint a set number of patrols to serve all year with a
selection of alternates to fill in when regular members are absent. Assign only the
necessary number of patrols to a single post.
Being a school safety patrol should be considered “special”. Do not make everyone in the
class a patrol. This dilutes the special feeling of being selected a patrol and seriously
limits resources.
Organization, Training and Operation

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
18
Equipment
The two identifying pieces of equipment for safety patrol members are:
• Official patrol belts
• Badges pinned to the shoulder strap of the belt at chest level
Schools also may provide additional equipment, such as ponchos, caps, and flags.
Assigned equipment should be documented. Officers must maintain a roster with each
patrol member’s name and a notation of equipment provided to them.
Please contact your local AAA club for specific ordering information.
Equipment: Care
Each patrol member must wear a belt and badge when on duty. Assign a sergeant to see
that patrol members are accountable for the care of equipment assigned to them. It is the
sergeant’s responsibility to keep a daily record of the condition of this school property.
Equipment includes:
• Belts • Flags • Ponchos
• Badges • Caps
The sergeant responsible for equipment works with the captain and patrol sponsor to
order replacement equipment. Equipment which is lost or misplaced must be replaced.
Worn out equipment should be destroyed.
Encourage students to refer to the Patrol Member Handbook for proper wear and care of
Patrol equipment.
Organization, Training and Operation
Note: AAA has studied roadside visibility issues and is researching ways to
improve existing equipment to increase the visibility of AAA School
Safety Patrols to approaching motorists.

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
19
Daily Operations
Schools should distribute the list of patrollers to staff and train patrol members to leave
their classes quietly and report to an assigned patrol assembly point.
The patrol captain or lieutenant:
• Takes attendance
• Ensures that all members are wearing their belts and badges
• Verifies that all posts are covered.
• Reminds patrol members to walk quietly and carefully to their posts
Mechanics of the Street Patrol
“Mechanics” are defined as the process, moves, and maneuvers of a patroller on duty.
The basic mechanics are:
• Arrive at your post early
• Determine how to judge a safe gap for your posted position
• Take a position at least one step back from the curb (or edge of the
street), arms down at a 45 degree angle, palms facing back
• Check all directions for traffic
• Keep students a safe distance from traffic
• Keep arms and palms positioned to hold all students from traffic until there
is a safe gap
• Never allow students to walk in front of a car that stops to allow them to cross
• Step aside and motion students across the street
• Continue to monitor traffic, when the safe gap ends, cut the flow of students
A patrol member should only step into the street far enough to see around an obstruction.
Organization, Training and Operation

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
20
Determining the Gap
The first important duty of patrol members is to determine a safe gap in traffic. The patrol
captain or supervisor will assist patrol members in determining when there is a break in
traffic that will allow students to safely cross the street.
To determine a safe gap, patrol members judge:
• Speed of vehicles
• Traffic volume
• Road and weather conditions
• Number of lanes of traffic
• Time required for small children to cross the street
To establish a safe gap:
• Walk across the street at normal speed when there is no traffic
• Count the seconds to cross safely and add five seconds to allow for
students who start across later than the lead student
• Pick a fixed point – such as a mailbox or signpost – about 1000 feet from
the student crossing point
• When a vehicle passes this point, count the seconds until the vehicle
reaches the crossing
Patrol members must pay attention to parked cars that may enter traffic, and vehicles that
may come from driveways or alleys.
To determine gaps at intersections with signals:
• On average, it takes 10 seconds for a child to cross
• If the signal remains green for 30 seconds, count 20 seconds, then stop
students from crossing until the next green light
Record Keeping
AAA provides two resources that help captains standardize recordkeeping: the Captain’s
Record Book and the Monthly Patrol Record Form.
The Captain maintains the Captain’s Record Book. Patrol records should cover:
• Daily attendance
• Number of times a patrol member is late
• Number of times a patrol member fails to wear proper equipment
Organization, Training and Operation

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
21
Meetings
Procedures
Schedule meetings twice a month. At least once a month, the school safety officer should
attend. It also may be appropriate to invite the principal, police, adult crossing guards and
bus drivers.
When conducting a meeting, follow parliamentary procedure, which is a set of widely
accepted rules that give meetings structure and order. Procedure books such as the
popular, Robert’s Rules of Ordercan be found in local public libraries.
The Patrol Captain presides at all meetings. The Lieutenant presides in the Captain’s
absence.
Patrol members wear belts and badges to meetings.
Agenda
Patrol officers should plan an agenda focused on both old and new patrol business.
Below is a sample agenda, incorporating parliamentary procedure:
• Call to order
• Pledge of Allegiance
• Roll call and inspection
• Secretary reads minutes of previous meeting
• Captain corrects or approves minutes
• Old business from previous meeting completed
• New business discussed
• Contributions from guests
• Training
• Captain requests motion to adjourn
• Captain asks for motion to be seconded
• Captain states the motion and asks for “ayes” and “nays”
• Captain officially adjourns the meeting (and may announce time and date
of next meeting)
Organization, Training and Operation

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
22
Meetings(continued)
Minutes
The secretary records meetings in a consistent format. A completed set of minutes is
signed by the secretary and becomes part of the official record of the patrol.
Elements which must be in the minutes:
• School name
• Date and time of meeting
• Attendance
• Results of inspection
• Summary of old business
• Summary of new business
• Additional comments/contributions from guests
(such as police officers, principals)
• Additional information (for example, training or recognition)
• Time meeting was dismissed
The secretary signs meeting minutes before turning them in to the captain.
Supervision
Overall responsibility for the patrol rests with the Patrol Supervisor.
On a daily basis, the Captain assigns posts, enforces rules, arranges for substitutes, and
maintains discipline.
The Captain is assisted by Lieutenants and a Sergeant.
Organization, Training and Operation

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
23
Role of Patrol at Signalized Intersections
Only police officers or adult crossing guards can stop vehicles.Patrol members
have specific duties based on their posts.
Duties of patrol members:
• Stand on the sidewalk, at least one step back from the curb and midway
between crosswalk lines
• Watch traffic flow and children approaching
• At red lights, signal students not to enter the intersection by holding arms
down at 45-degree angle to the body
• At green lights, determine all approaching traffic has stopped before
allowing students to cross
• Check traffic in all directions for a suitable gap and then permit children
to cross
• Before the light changes back to red, return to the outstretched arms
position to prevent children from being caught in the middle of
the intersection
Bus Loading and Unloading
Bus stop patrol is an important duty. Students often arrive at bus stops early and may not
pay attention to traffic while waiting.
School officials should encourage students to arrive no earlier than 10 minutes before the bus
is scheduled to arrive. The school also should designate a waiting area away from the road.
The bus stop patrol:
• Keeps students out of the street and away from traffic
• Lines students up for boarding when the bus arrives
• Assists small students in boarding the bus
• Checks the bus stop to ensure no belongings are left behind
• If a school bus must be evacuated, safety patrols may assist bus drivers.
If a bus driver is incapacitated, the patrol may direct the evacuation.
On Patrol

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
24
On the Bus
Assign one to three patrol members to a bus. They remain seated when the bus is moving.
Front patrol members sit in the right front seat of the bus and:
• Disembark at all regular stops to assist students entering and leaving the bus
• Assist the driver in keeping objects out of the aisles
• Remind students to keep heads and arms inside the bus
• Reaffirm the track is clear at railroad crossings
Middle patrol members sit in the middle of the bus and:
• Monitor student noise and behavior
• Keep students seated and aisles clear
• Remind students to keep arms and heads inside the bus
• Assist loading and unloading
Rear patrol members sit near the back emergency door and:
• Check the bus for articles left behind by students
• Operate the rear emergency door in case of emergency
Carpools
Some schools place patrols at pick-up and drop-off spots in front of the school to
protect carpoolers.
Patrol members assigned to these positions:
• Help students enter and exit vehicles safely
• Assist small children and students whose arms are full
• Monitor students and keep them on the sidewalk until traffic has stopped
• Direct students to proceed in an orderly fashion from the parking lot to
the school
On Patrol
Note: Bus Patrol members are typically students from the first bus stops
in the morning and the last bus stops in the evening that provide
assistance to the bus driver for the entire route.

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
25
Reporting Dangerous Practices
Part of the pledge school patrollers take is a promise to “report dangerous student
practices.” Just what are those practices? A dangerous practice endangers students.
When a patrol member observes a dangerous practice they should:
• Politely explain the risk to the offender (if it is another student)
• Seek an adult if the behavior continues
• Only touch another student in an emergency
• Report dangerous situations to a patrol officer or Patrol Supervisor for
follow-up
If another patrol member is involved in a dangerous practice, this should be reported to
the Patrol Supervisor. Individual school system guidelines should be in place to handle
such disciplinary actions, including probation, suspension and dismissal.
Role of Police
In many communities, law enforcement officers work directly with patrols. They serve as
safety patrol coordinators who contribute to operations, training, and development.
Law enforcement can make an important contribution to the success of your patrol
program, including:
• Promoting motorist awareness of patrols
• Promoting community respect for patrols
• Contributing to patrol training
Only police officers and adult crossing guards can stop vehicles.
On Patrol

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
26
Role of Adult Crossing Guards
Adult crossing guards may be assigned to high-traffic areas. They can help create safe
gaps in traffic, control turning traffic, and assist large groups of children crossing busy
intersections. They are typically community employees supervised by law enforcement.
Adult crossing guards are typically assigned to:
• High-traffic streets with safe gaps more than a minute apart
• Signalized intersections where turning automobiles are a hazard
• Crossings near schools with a high volume of walking students
• Locations where 85 percent of the traffic speed exceeds the speed limit
• Areas of reduced visibility
• School districts with inadequate school route plans
• Locations beyond the capability of student patrols
Patrols can be deployed to assist an Adult Crossing Guard. This is particularly useful at
wide crossings or locations with heavy pedestrian volumes. The adult crossing guard and
the police will establish procedures consistent with guidelines for patrol deployment
described in this manual.
On Patrol

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
27
School Support
The more importance and visibility the school gives to the AAA School Safety Patrol, the
more the potential benefit. The program deserves recognition as:
• A safety measure
• A character-building program
• As a leadership development program
• Citizenship and volunteerism in action
• A real-world “lab” that teaches life skills such as teamwork, responsibility,
problem-solving, and effective communication
• Means to enhance rapport between students and authority figures (school
officers, law enforcement)
• A program that creates positive role models for younger students
• An opportunity for students to learn about traffic safety and the rules of
interfacing with traffic
Schools should encourage teachers to participate, involve the PTA and community groups,
and make the recognition of the contribution made by the AAA School Safety Patrol a priority.
Fundraising
Schools across the country have raised funds for their school safety patrols by:
• Hosting a movie for students and selling popcorn
• Holding a bake sale
• Contacting fundraising companies that provide sale items
• Creating buttons or stickers for a small cost
• Offering a gift-wrapping service at the holidays
• Car washes
• Collecting recyclables
• Setting up a compost heap “fed” by classrooms and the cafeteria each
day. Sell bags of fertilizer in the spring
• Obtaining plants or seedlings from the parks department and selling them
to the community
• Setting up a booth at a town street fair or similar community celebration
and providing face-painting or simple goods or services
• Holding a safety fair and inviting AAA, the Red Cross and other safety
organizations to participate
• Challenging students to a walk-a-thon, bike-a-thon (with helmets!) or
bowl-a-thon and asking sponsors to pledge contributions
Supporting Your Patrol Program

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
28
Discipline
Patrol members must understand there are serious consequences for breaking rules. Most
patrols maintain discipline with a merit/demerit system. Parents should be advised prior to
any disciplinary action.
Merit points are awarded for:
• Work in addition to regular duty
• Conducting safety talks to classes
• Making constructive suggestions
• Additional contributions to teamwork
Demerit points are awarded for:
• Attempting to direct traffic
• Leaving the sidewalk
• Allowing children to cross without ensuring the way is clear
• Leaving their post without permission
• Being tardy or absent without an acceptable reason
• Behavior unbecoming a patroller
• Arriving for duty without badge or belt
• Breaking safety rules
• Disobedience
By accumulating merit points, a patrol member may earn more important assignments.
Accumulating demerits may result in suspension or dismissal from the patrol.
Supporting Your Patrol Program

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
29
Morale Building
A key duty of the Patrol Supervisor is to maintain enthusiasm and commitment to the
program. Attention by the school and ownership by students keep morale high.
It is important for schools to recognize the educational value and service of the entire
school patrol.
Many schools recognize this service with certificates of appreciation, merit pins, and
thank-yous to the school patrol in school newsletters and Web sites.
Schools also may ask area businesses for small contributions, such as gift certificates or
coupons for patrol members. Examples of gifts may include inexpensive raincoats or
watches, or catering for a recognition luncheon or dinner.
Activities that may be introduced to build Safety Patrol pride and morale include:
• Reserving a section of the school newsletter or school web site for safety
patrol news
• Assigning a display or bulletin board to the patrol
• Writing personalized notes of appreciation to parents
• Introducing and thanking the patrol at assembly
• Involving the student council in recognition activities
• Creating a safety patrol honor guard
• Hosting an annual patrol luncheon or dinner
• Proclaiming AAA School Safety Patrol Day or Patrol Appreciation Day at a
local attraction
• Promoting a friendly sporting competition between neighboring patrols
• Establishing a special weekly play period for patrol members
• Offering refreshments such as hot chocolate or ice cream to patrol members
• Hosting special events such as pizza parties, movie outings, sporting
events, or end-of-year picnics
Supporting Your Patrol Program

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
30
Recognition Programs
AAA makes available award certificates and a pin that can be presented at school
assemblies or celebrations. Contact your local AAA Club for details.
Certificates of Meritare available for students who satisfactorily complete service as a
patrol member.
Service Pinin silver is available for outstanding service while a patrol member.
There are two national awards programs to recognize the efforts of AAA School Safety
Patrollers: The Lifesaving Award Medal and the National Patroller of the Year.
Lifesaving Award Medal
In 1949, AAA held the first Lifesaving Medal Awards to recognize those Safety Patrollers
who while on duty saved a life or prevented the injury of a fellow student. As we approach
2005, over 380 students have been presented with prestigious honor.
The Lifesaving Medal is awarded by an independent review board to a member of any
authorized School Safety Patrol when there is conclusive proof that:
1. The life of the person saved was in imminent danger;
2. The act was performed while the patrol member was on duty, going to or from
a duty post, or while on duty as a bus patrol member;
3. No negligence on the part of the patrol member caused or contributed to the
person rescued being in danger.
The AAA Lifesaving Medal has been presented by U.S. Presidents Ford, Johnson,
Kennedy and Eisenhower; Vice Presidents Mondale, Humphrey, Nixon and Barkley;
First Lady Mamie Eisenhower; justices of the U.S. Supreme Court; cabinet officials; and
other dignitaries.
Supporting Your Patrol Program

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
31
Recognition Programs (continued)
National Patroller of the Year
In 2002, AAA introduced the National Patroller of the Year Award to recognize the patroller
that best exemplifies leadership qualities and performs their duties effectively and
responsibly, without incident. The National Patroller of the Year is selected from the field of
Club Patrollers of the Year that our nominated by local AAA clubs.
School Safety Patrol advisers may nominate one current-year patrol member with the
following qualifications. The candidate must:
• Be enrolled in the highest participating grade level of the School Safety Patrol
• Demonstrate leadership qualities, safety skills, school involvement, and
citizenship/volunteerism
• Value the patrol experience
Contact your local AAA Club for details
Supporting Your Patrol Program

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
32
Resources
School’s Open Drive Safely
For more than 50 years, AAA has sponsored the School’s Open – Drive Safely campaign.
The goal of this awareness campaign is to reduce the number of traffic crashes involving
school-age pedestrians and school bus riders by reminding drivers to be extra-cautious.
Participating schools may obtain colorful posters for display and other “School’s Open”
items. Contact your local AAA Club for details.
Best Route to School
Safety experts at AAA have developed 10 rules that help parents and children determine the
Best Route to School. Use the following tips to aid AAA School Safety Patrols in the
promotion of safe walking practices to fellow students:
•Walk on sidewalks:Watch out for cars pulling into, and backing out of driveways
•Walk on the left facing traffic if there are no sidewalks:Staying to the left allows you to
watch oncoming traffic and get out of the way if necessary
•Cross only at corners:Avoid the dangerous practice of “jaywalking.” Cross at an
intersection controlled by a traffic light wherever possible
•Stop and look all ways before crossing:If there’s no traffic light, wait until oncoming
cars are at least a block away before crossing
•Watch For Turning Cars:Children sometimes forget to look and unintentionally walk into
the side of a turning vehicle
•Continue to look left, right and left again as you cross:It’s easy to miss an oncoming car
•Never cross between parked cars:It’s almost impossible for drivers to see youngsters
who enter the roadway from between parked cars
•Play away from traffic:Playgrounds, schoolyards and your own backyard are the safest
places to play
•Be especially alert in bad weather:Rain, snow, fog and even umbrellas can obstruct
vision. Also, drivers may be unable to stop quickly. Children should wear brightly
colored and retro-reflective clothing
•Obey police officers, adult crossing guards, AAA Safety Patrol members, and traffic
signals:These “safety guardians” can greatly enhance a child’s safety when going to
and from school
Related Programs and Resources

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
33
Resources (continued)
Check with your local AAA club for safety patrol equipment, materials, and awards to
support your AAA School Safety Patrol Program. Available materials may include:
Printed Materials, Guides and Forms
• Handbooks
• Brochures
• Manuals
• Captain’s Record Book
• Policies and Practices
Recognition Awards
• Certificates
• Patches
• Pins
Patrol Equipment
• Belts
• Badges
• Patrol Hats
• Ponchos
• Flags
Related Programs and Resources

SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
34
Top Tips
• Solicit contributions and expertise from Parent Teacher Associations or Parent Teacher
Organizations, bus drivers, teachers, traffic and safety experts, and law enforcement
• Dedicate a section of the school newsletter or Web site to school safety patrol news
and highlight a patrol member each month
• Encourage communication between patrols by arranging get-togethers, such as shared
training or recognition events
• Reward patrol members with ice cream, hot chocolate, or a meal hosted by Parent
Teacher Associations or Parent Teacher Organizations
• Dedicate an exhibit case or bulletin board to school safety patrol information; including
a map with posts identified. Add a photo of the patrol member assigned to each post
• Write a thank-you note to the members of your school safety patrol and their parents
Related Programs and Resources

Quick Reference Checklist
❏Contact your local AAA Club
❏Develop partnerships with the School, AAA, PTA, Law
enforcement, and the community
❏Secure official school authorization
❏Establish policies and procedures
❏Select Patrol Supervisor
❏Select Patrol Members and obtain parental permission
❏Select posts and intersections for duty
❏Train Patrol Members on equipment care, procedures
and standards
❏Select officers
❏Assign duties and posts
❏School announcements
❏Installation of Patrol
How to begin a AAA School Safety Patrol
SCHOOL SAFETY PATROL OPERATIONS MANUAL
3238
10/04
Traffic Safety Programs

Text Version Not Currently Available

REGIONAL BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN PLAN
Adirondack/Glens Falls  Transportation Council
Adirondack/Glens
Falls  Transportation Council

July
2014
July
2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction  ………………………………………………………………………………………..  1
Purpose  ………………………………………………………………………………………..  1
Benefits  of  Bicycle  and  Pedestrian  Facilities  ………………………………………  2
Bicycle  Improvements  ………………………………………………………………………….  3
Existing  Conditions  …………………………………………………………………………  3
Priority  Bicycle  Network  ………………………………………………………………….  4
Design  Standards ……………………………………………………………………………  8
Bicycle  Shoulder  Physical  Feasibility  Analysis  …………………………………..  13
Bicycle  Facility  Improvement  Process   …………………………………………….  15
Other  Bicycle  Improvements  ………………………………………………………….  18
Pedestrian  Improvements  …………………………………………………………………..  19
Pedestrian  Facilities:  Policies  and  Legislation  …………………………………..  19
Pedestrian  Design  Features  ……………………………………………………………  22
Pedestrian  Facilities  in  Suburban  and  Rural  Environments  ………………..  29
Pedestrian  Priority  Map  ………………………………………………………………..  30
Implementation  …………………………………………………………………………………  32
Partnerships  ………………………………………………………………………………..  32
Funding  ……………………………………………………………………………………….  33
References:
AASHTO.  (July  2004).  Guide  for the  Planning,  Design,  and  Operation  of Pedestrian  Facili ‐
ties.
Hughes,  H.  H.  (2001).  Evaluation  of  Automated  Pedestrian  Detection  at Signalized  Inter‐
sections.  Federal Highway  Administration.
NYSDOT.  (2013).  Highway  Design  Manual,  Chapter  18:  Pedestrian  Facility  Design.
United  States Access  Board.  (2011).  Accessibility  Guidelines  for  Pedestrian  Facilities  in  the
Public  Right‐of‐Way.  Authority:  29  U.S.C.  792  and 42  U.S.C.  12204.

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
1
1

INTRODUCTION
Purpose
The Adirondack/Glens  Falls  Transportation  Council  (A/GFTC)  has
prepared  this  Regional  Bicycle  &  Pedestrian  Plan  with  the  intent  to
provide  a  framework  for  future  improvements  which  will  result  in
a  more  comprehensive  network  of  bicycle  and  pedestrian  facilities
in  Warren,  Washington,  and  northern  Saratoga  Counties.
This  plan,  which  updates  the  Bicycle  and  Pedestrian  Plan  prepared
by  A/GFTC  in  2000,  has  be en

created  in  conjunction  with  a  process
which  takes  into  account  the  priorities  of  the  local  municipalities
and  stakeholders  in  the  A/GFTC  region.  This process  is  intended  to
strengthen  ties  so  that  partnerships  can  continue  in  the  future
implementation  of the  priority  projects.  The  plan  in cl
udes:
An inventory  of  existing  conditions  at  a  regional  scale
A review  of all  available  community  plans  and  priorities  for
each  municipality
Identification  of  priority  bicycle  network  connections  and
pedestrian  priority  areas
Guidance  to  select  appropriate  design features
Identification  of  local  policies  to  support  bicycle  and
pedestrian  activity
A plan  for  implementation
This  process  has  resulted  in  a  plan  which  identifies  feasible,  real ‐
world  actions  that  can  be  taken  to  improve  biking  and  walking
within  the  region.  By  coordinating  implementation  across  local,
county,  and  state  levels,  it is  hoped  that  the  plan  will  increase  the
efficiency  and  efficacy  of  improvements.

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
2
2

Benefits of Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
Biking
and  walking,  whether  conducted  as  a mode  of
transportation  or  as  a recreational  activity, offer  a wide  variety  of
personal,  social,  and  environmental  benefits.  On  a  personal  level,
biking  and  walking  are not  only  ways  to  become  or  stay  physically
active,  but  also  affordable,  fun  transportation  methods  available  to
all  ages.  Socially,  these  ac ti
vities reduce  health  care  costs  and
vehicular  traffic,  can  provide  a healthy  activity  for  families  and
children,  and  can  provide  an  important  component  to  the  local
economy  in  terms  of tourism.  In  terms  of  the  environment,  biking
and  walking  can  be  an  effective  way  to  reduce  dependence  on  the
automobile,  and  subsequ ently re

duce  carbon  emissions.
With  all  these  benefits,  many  communities  are  demonstrating  a
strong  interest  in  strengthening  and  improving  bicycle  and
pedestrian  infrastructure,  on  both  a  local  and  regional  level.  Many
of  the  communities  within  the region  have  been  active  in  pursuing
ways  to  directly  and indirectly  im
prove  the  biki ng and  walking
experie

nce.  This has  included  innovative  partnerships,  physical
projects,  and  policies  that  encourage  improvements  to
infrastructure.  This plan  underscores  the  ongoing  commitment  to
encourage  pedestrian  and  bicycle  activity  for  the benefit  of
residents,  business owners,  and visitors  alike.

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
3
3

BICYCLE IMPROVEMENTS
Existing Conditions
This
section  of  the  plan  is  intended  to guide  the  improvement  of
bicycle  facilities  and  the  future  designation  of  bicycle  routes.  This
effort  is  not  “starting  from  scratch”,  but  is rather  the continuation
of  many  years  of  work  by  several  agencies.  A/GFTC,  local  bike
groups,  and  individual  municipalities  have  been  active  in
encouraging  accommodati ons for

cyclists.  It is  therefore  important
to  take  stock  of  the  conditions  for  cyclists  as  they  stand  today.
The  A/GFTC  region  currently  is  home  to  a  growing  bicycle  network,
including:
Separated  right ‐of ‐way  trails:  The A/GFTC  area  has
approximately  17  miles  of  trails  which  accommodate  non‐
roadway  travel. The  most  extensive  network  consists  of  the
Warren  County  Bikeway  and  Feeder  Canal  Trails, which  link  the
City  of  Glens  Falls  to  the  Villages  of  Fort  Edward,  Hudson  Falls,
and  Lake  George,  and  the  Towns  of  Queensbury,  Fort  Edward,
and  Ki ngsbur

y.  In addition,  there  are almost  5  miles  of  trail
located  in the  Village  and  Town  of  Granville.  This trail  is
located  along the  D&H  rail  bed  and extends  into  Vermont.
Finally,  the  Betar  Byway  in  South  Glens  Falls  links  the
downtown  to  the  Town  Beach  and  other  destinat ions.
Designated  cycling  routes: There are  currently  about  100
miles  of  on ‐road  bicycle  routes,  located  on  State  highways  and
local  roads  throughout  the  area.  These  include  US  Route  9  in
Saratoga  County,  NY  Route  197  in the  Town  of Moreau,  US
Route  4  and  NYS  22  (both  are elements  of  NYS  Bicycle  Route
9),  as  well  as  local  roads  in  the  Towns  of  Que ensbury,
Lake
Luzerne  and  the  City  of  Gl

ens Falls.  It is  anticipated  that  this
network  of  on ‐road  bicycle  routes  will  continue  to  grow  as
local  communities  adopt  policies  in  support  of  the  A/GFTC
Bicycle  and  Pedestrian  Plan  and  NYS  Complete  Streets
legislation.
There  are also  other  bi cy
cl

e  route  networks  and  facilities
surrounding  the  region,  especially  in  Saratoga,  Essex,  and  Hamilton
Counties.  These  include  networks  such  as  the  Saratoga  County
Heritage  Trail  and  the  “Bike  the  Byways”  network. Creating  and
maintaining  strong  connections  to  these  neighboring  opportunities
is  a  key  aspect  of  this  plan .

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
4
4

Priority Bicycle Network
The
goal  of  this  plan  is  to  provide  a  framework  for  future
improvements  which  will  result  in  a  more  expansive  and
comprehensive  network of  bicycle  and  pedestrian  facilities  in  the
A/GFTC  region.  Most  of  these  facilities  are  likely  to  be  located
along  existing  roadways.  However,  it is  not  realistic  to assume  tha
t
every  roadway  will be  the  focus  of  bi cycl

e  improvement  projects,
especially  given  current  funding  limitations.
As  such,  an  important  component  of  this  plan  involved  setting
priorities  to  identify  which  roadways  represent  the  highest  priority
for  designation  as  bike  routes  and/or  capital  improvements.  To  set
realistic  and  feasible  actions for  this  pla n,
several  factors  were
considered,  i n

cluding  local  priorities,  the  needs  of  the  cycling
community,  and  transportation  connectivity.
Local Priority  Routes: Many  local  municipalities  have
addressed  the  need  for bicycle  facilities  in  planning
documents.  All  available  local planning  documents  were
reviewed  to  determine  the  stated  bicycle  transportation
priorities  in  each  municipality.  Map  1  illustrates  the  roads
specifically  mentioned  within  a municipal  plan  as  being
suitable  for  current  bike  use  or  desired  for  bike  use  in  th e

future.   This  an a

lysis  highlights  the  fact  that  not  every
community  has  stated  priorities  concerning  cycling.  Some
communities  have  identified  specific  on ‐ and  off‐road
alignments,  while  others  include  a  general  statement  of
support  for  bicycling  issues.  Still  others  make  no mention  of
cycling  at all;  however,  this should  not  infer  that  the
commu

nity  does  not  support  bicycle  infrastructure.  Nothing  in
this  plan  is  intended  to  prevent  local  municipalities  from
supporting  the  establishment  of  additional  bicycle  facilities,
nor  to obligate  communities  to  engage  in projects  in  the
future.
Bicycle  Advocate  Priority  Routes:  Maintaining  and  promoting
safe,  functional  bicycle  facilities  along  the  roads  most  used  by
cyclists  is  a  key  goal  of  this  plan.  To facilitate  this,  several
stakeholder  groups  within  the  region  were  asked  to  generate  a
list  of  cycling  routes  and  desired  connections,  including  the
Warren  County  Safe  &  Quality  Bicycling  Organization  and  the
Cambridge  V a
lley  Cycling  Club.  These  road

ways  represent  the
 Terminology
Terminology

This
plan  makes  frequent  reference  to  two
important  concepts  relating  to  bicycle
networks.  These  include:
Bike Routes: A  system  or  network  of
roads,  streets,  paths  or  ways  that  have
been  designated  by the  jurisdiction
having  authority  with  directional  and/
or  informational  signage  or  pavement
markings.  It  should  not  be implied  that
roadways  not  designated  as  bike
routes  cannot  or  should  not  be  used
by  cyclists.
Bike Facilities:  The physical  surface on
which  the  cyclists  ride.  These  may
include,  but  are not  limited  to,  multi‐
use  trails,  bike  lanes,  road shoulders,
or  vehicle  travel  lanes. A  description  of
the  different  types  of  bicycle  facilities
is  included  in  this  plan.  Bike  facilities
can  also  include  other features
designed  to  accommodate/encourage
cycling,  such  as  bike  parki

ng  facilities.

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
5
5

alignments
of  existing  bike  events,  important
connections  to  recreation  destinations,  and
roadways  which  are enjoyable  to ride  (see Map
1).  Although  recreational  riding  is not  the  focus  of
this  plan,  it  is  important  to  recognize  those  routes
which  are  favored  by  the  biking  community.
The  maps  of  individual  priorities  provide  a  wide  range
of  on–  and  off‐road  options  for  a potential  bicycle
network.  From  among  these,  a  Priority  Bicycle
Network  was  selected  (Ma p 2).  Th

is  Priority  Network
balances  the  needs  of  the  local  municipalities  and
cycling  community  with  A/GFTC’s  focus  on  providing
transportation  options  throughout  the  region.  This
includes  connections  to  destinations  within  the  A/
GFTC  re g

ion,  as  well  as bike  routes  in  adjacent
counties.
This  network  is  intended  to  assist  in  the  decision ‐
making  process  for  both  designating  bicycle  routes
and  selecting  bicycle  improvement  projects.
However,  the  selection  of  capital  projects  involves
other  equally  important  factors.  The  following  section
of  this  pla n
a ddresses  the  design,  feasibility,  and
imple
mentation  of bicycle  improvement  projects.
Priority Bicycle Network
Priority
Bicycle Network

This
network  of  on ‐ and  off‐road  connections  balances
the  needs  of  the  local  municipalities  and  cycling
community  with  regional  transportation  connections.
A  detailed  map of  the  Priority  Bicycle  Network  can  be
found  online  here:
http://www.agftc.org/altern ativetransportation.htm

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |

Map 1: Municipal/Cyclist Group Bicycle Priority Map
6
6

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |

Map 2: A/GFTC Bicycle Priority Network
A
detailed  map  of  the  Priority  Bicycle Network
can  be  found  online  at
http://www.agftc.org/alternativetransportation.htm
7
7

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
8
8

Design Standards
Design
standards  for  bicycle  facilities  can  apply  to  the  location,
width,  pavement,  and other  features  such  as  drainage  grates  and
protective  railings.  These standards  may  be  applied  to  all  or part  of
an  on ‐road  facility  or  an  multi‐use  trail.
The  selection  of  a  bicycle  facility  depends  on  many  variables:  the
type  of cyclist  likely  to  use  the  facility;  tr affic

mix,  volume,  speed,
parking,  and  sight  distances  (for  on ‐road  facilities);  bicycle  speed,
grade,  multi‐ use capacity,  and  roadway/rail  crossings  (for  off‐road
facilities).  Several  agencies,  including NYSDOT,  FHWA,  and
AASHTO,  have  compiled  manuals  and  guidance  documents  which
can  help  to se lect
the  most  appropriate  design  standards  for  each
type  of  fa

cility.
For  the purposes  of  this  document,  the  most  commonly  applicable
design  standards  have  been  summarized  below. This  summary  is
intended  to  aid  in  the  prioritization  of  improvement  projects,  by
outlining  general  minimum  standards  for  the  types  of  facilities
most  likely  to  be  proposed  in  the  A/GFTC  region.  The design
standards  are  based  on  tho s

e in  the  NYSDOT  Highway  Design
Manual  Chapter  17 (Bicycle  Facility  Design),  and  on  AASHTO’s  2012
Guide  for the Development  of  Bicycle  Facilities.  Please  note that
these  standards  are  general;  specific  design  of  bicycle  facilities
must take  into  account  any  applicable  requirements  for  the
specific  roadway—i.e.  Federal,  State,  or  Local  regulations,  as
appropriate. Standards  for  features  such  as  bridges  or  railings
have  not  been  included;  refer  to  the  appropriate  guidance
document  for  detail  concerning  these  facilities.
This  summary  is  not  intended  to limit  the range  of  potential  bicycle
facilities  in  the  A/GFTC  region.  As  new  standards  are  adopted,  and
different  types  of  bicycle  facilities  teste d
and  de ployed,  it  is
recomme

nded  that these  new  techniques  be  reviewed  to
determine  if  they  may  be  appropriate  to conditions  in  the  A/GFTC
region.
Guidance Documents for
Guidance
Documents for
Bicycle Facility Design
Bicycle
Facility Design
Standards:
Standards:

American
Association  of State
Highway  and  Transportation
Officials  (AASHTO):  Guide for  the
Development  of  Bicycle  Facilities ,
2012
Federal  Highway  Administration
(FHWA):  Bikesafe:  Bicycle
Countermeasure  Selection  System ,
May  2006;  Selecting  Roadway
Design  Treatments  to
Accommodate  Bicycles , 1992
New  York State  Department  of
Transportation:  Highway  Design
Manual,  Chapter  17  Bicycle  Facility
Design,  2006

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
9
9

Bike
Shoulders (aka Wide Shoulders)
Most appropriate  for:  Rural/suburban  roadways  with limited
sections  of  curbing  and  without  on ‐street  parking.  This  is  a  space
that  can  be  used  by bicycles  but  is  not  specifically  devoted  to
them.
Design  standards:
4’‐wide (min.)  shoulder  for  non ‐curbed
roadways  with  speeds  under  40  MPH.  Width  increased  to 6’  for
higher ‐speed/higher ‐volume roadways,  roads which  exceed  5%
grade  for  6 miles  or  longer,  or  roads  with  curbs  or  other  obstacles
at  the  edge  of  pavement.   No  special  pavement  markings  are
required.
Advantages:

Many bike  shoulders  already  exist
No additional  maintenance  required  beyond  that  which  is
required  for  the roadway
Can sometimes  be  accommodated  via  re ‐striping
Appropriate  for rural  and  suburban  areas
No additional  striping  at  intersections
Disadvantages:

Less comfortable  for beginning/average  cyclists  than  bike  lanes
May require  additional  ROW  width
Cars parked  on  shoulder  can  reduce  space  available  in
shoulder  for  cyclists
6’ ‐ with  curb  4’ ‐ no  curb  Travel  lane
Above:  Wide  shoulder  designated  as a  bicycle  route
Diagram  of  typical  design  of  wide  shoulders

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
10
10

Bike
Lanes
Most appropriate  for:  Urban  roadways  with  curbing  and  on ‐street
parking.  Unlike  road  shoulders,  bike lanes  are  dedicated  solely  to
use  by  bicycles.
Design  standards:
4’‐wide (with  no  on ‐street  parking/curb)  or  5’‐
wide  (with  on‐street  parking/curb)  striped  lane  located  between
travel  lane  and  parking  lane/curb.   Requires  pavement  markings
and  directional  signage.
Advantages:

Higher profile/visibility  for  cyclists
Channelizes  bike  traffic
More  comfortable  for beginning/average  cyclists to  ride
Minimizes  cars  swerving  into  other  lane  to  avoid  cyclists
Can sometimes  be  accommodated  via  re ‐striping
Disadvantages:

Intersections can  become  complicated  with extra  bike  lane
striping  and  signage  (see  images  below  left)
May  require  additional  ROW  width
Mainly  an  urban  roadway  feature
Can pose  conflict  with  on ‐street  parking
Can be  blocked  by illegally  parked  cars
Top:  Bike  lane  without  on ‐street  parking
Bottom:  Bike  lane  with  on ‐street  parking
(photos  courtesy  of  pedbikeimages.org)
Top:  Striping  for  bike  lanes  at  intersection
Bottom:  Signage  for  bike  lanes
(photos  courtesy  of  pedbikeimages.org)

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
11
11

Shared
‐Use Lanes (a.k.a. Wide Curb Lanes)
Most appropriate  for:  Roadways  which  allow  bicycles  and  vehicles
to  ride  side‐by‐side,  but  in which  other  bicycle  facilities  cannot  be
accommodated.  Use  only  if  all  other  options  are  unfeasible.
Design  standards:
14’‐wide desired  travel  lane
Advantages:

Minimal striping  or  maintenance  required
Benefits to  non ‐bicycle  traffic:  accommodates  buses  and  truck
turning  movements/emergency  maneuvers
Disadvantages:

Least comfortable  for  beginning/average  cyclists
Wider travel  lanes  can  increase  traffic  speeds
Can pose  conflict  with  on ‐street  parking
No visual  indication  that the  roadway  contains a  bicycle  facility

14’‐wide  lane 14’‐wide  lane Parking  lane:
width  varies
Wide curb lane
(photo  courtesy  of pedbikeimages.org)
Typical  design standard  for  wide  curb  lane

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
12
12

Shared
‐Lane Markings
Most appropriate  for:  Roadways  with  lanes  less  than  14′  and
speeds  under  40  mph  where  no  other  dedicated  bicycle  facility  can
be  feasibly  accommodated.
Design  standards:
Set by  NYSDOT  supplement  of  the  MUTCD.
Pavement  markings  (“sharrow”)  and  signage  deployed  in
conjunction.
Advantages:

Less expensive  to deploy  than  facilities  which  require  road
widening  or  construction
No physical  changes  needed  to  roadway
Reduces  wrong ‐way cycling
Disadvantages:

Initial deployment  may  be  confusing  to  cyclists  and  motorists
May be  less  comfortable  for beginning/average  cyclists

Multi‐ Use Trail/Path (aka Off‐ Road Trail)
Most  appropriate  for:  Areas  with  existing  linear  ROW (rail/utility
corridors,  for  example)  which  link  destinations
Design  standards:
10’‐wide recommended  for  a two ‐way  path  (12’
preferred)
Advantages:

Least potential  for  vehicle/bike  conflict
Most comfortable  for  beginning/average  cyclists
Potential  to create  direct links
Recreation  amenity
Disadvantages:

Highest cost  to  implement  –  requires  ROW  acquisition,  design,
and  construction
Requires  separate  maintenance;  many  municipalities  may  be
unable  to  provide  maintenance
Top: Signage  for  shared‐ lane roadways
Bottom:  Pavement  marking  for  shared‐ lanes

Multi ‐use  trail

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
13
13

Bicycle Shoulder Physical Feasibility Analysis
In
addition  to identifying  the  location  of  important  bicycle
connections  (the  Priority  Network),  and  summarizing  the
applicable  design  standards  for  conditions  in  the  A/GFTC  region,
this  plan  also  analyzed  whether roadways  may  currently  have  the
requisite  pavement  width  to  meet  the  Design  Standard
appropriate  to the  context.  A  GIS  map  was  prepared  which
compares  the  existi ng
shoulder  width  to  the  bike  shoulders  Design
Standard.  Th is creates  a  co

nservative  analysis,  as the  width
necessary  for  the wide  shoulder  Design  Standard  is  greater  than or
equal  to  the  dimensions  needed  for  any  other  type  of  bicycle
facility.  As  such,  it  can  be  broadly  assumed  that  a  roadway  which  is
wide  e

nough  to  support  the  Design  Standard  for  bike  shoulders
will  likely  also  be  wide  enough  for shared  lanes,  bike lanes,  and so
forth.
The  existing  shoulder  width  was  based  on  GIS  information,  then
verified  via  inspection  by  A/GFTC  staff.  For  the  purposes  of  this
plan,  th
e average  paved  shoulder  width  was  measu r

ed  for  each
section  of roadway.   Roads  with  on ‐street  parking  were  not
included  in  this  analysis,  nor  were  gravel  shoulders.  This  analysis
does  not  take  into  account  the condition  of  the  pavement.  The
shoulder  width  was  then  compared  to the  posted  speed limit for
the  roadway.  It  sh o
u

ld  be  noted  that the  posted  speed  limit  is not
the  only  relevant  factor  when  determining  the  required  width  of  a
bike  shoulder.  Topography,  functional  classification  of  the
roadway,  traffic volume  and  mix,  and  sight  distance  are  all  other
factors  which  can  influence  the  appropriate  bike  sho ulder
width.
Posted  speed was  chosen  as  the  analysis  method  for

this  plan  to
facilitate  the  GIS  analysis.
The  results  of  this  analysis  are  shown  in  Map  3, which  indicates
that  the  majority  of  priority  roadways  do  not  have  current
sufficient  width to  meet  the  wide  shoulder  Design  Standard.  It is
crucial  to  note  tha t
lack  of  shoulder  width  does  not  im

ply  that  a
roadway  is inherently  unsafe  or  unsuitable  for  use  by  cyclists.  The
intent  of  this  mapping  exercise was  to determine  which,  if  any,
roadways  could  currently  meet  (or  come  close  to  meeting)  this
design  standard.  This  information  can be  usefu l
in  helping  roadw a
y
owners  determine  the  scope  of work  required  to  create  or
enhance  bicycle facilities  in  the  future.
Right
Right
‐
‐
of
of
‐
‐
Way
Way

Throughout
this document,  reference  is
made  to  “right‐of ‐way”, or ROW.   This
refers  to the  land  acquired  for, or
devoted  to,  transportation  purposes.  This
could  be a  road  (possibly  including
sidewalks)  or  a  path  or  trail  not
associated  with the  street  network.
In  many  cases,  the  ROW  is  owned
outright  by  the  enti
ty which  has  a utho
rity
over  the  road  or  trail—a  local
municipality,  a  county,  or  NYSDOT.  The
ROW  is  often  wider  than  the  actual  road
or   trail,  so  that  curbs,  sidewalks,
drainage,  signs,  and other  features  may
be  accommodated.
It   must  also  be  noted  that  many
roadways  in  the  A/GFTC  region  pr eda
t
e
formal  acquisition  by  the  municipality.
These  are  known  as  “user  highways”,
“highways  by  use”,  or “roads  by  use”.  The
public  right‐of ‐way  extends  only  to  the
“extent  of  actual  use”.  A  recent  NYS  court
opinion*  has  determined  that  “extent  of
actual  use  may  include,  in  addition  to  the
traveled  portion,  the  shoulders  an d
whatever

land  is  necessary  for  the safety
of  the   public  and  for  ordinary  repairs and
improvements.”
As  such,  widening  these  types  of  roads
past  the  extent  of  actual  use  usually
involves  acquisition  of  property  from
adjacent  landowners,  which  can
significantly  increase  the  cost  and  time
frame  of  cons truction
projects.
* Op  Atty  Gen (Informal) No.  99‐19
http://www.ag.ny.gov/sites/de fault/files/opinion/I%2099 ‐19%20pw.pdf

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |

Map 3: Shoulder Width Analysis
Note:
Road  sections  with on ‐street  parking  not  included  in  analysis.
14
14

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
15
15

Bicycle Facility Improvement Process
The
priority  network  identified  in  this  plan  is intended  to  serve  as  a
guide  for  the location  of  bicycle  facility  improvements.  However,
several  other  factors  will  play  an important  role  in the  timing  and
selection  of  projects  which  further  this plan.  These  are  listed
below.
Funding  availability. As  of  the  date  of  this  report,  traditional
A/GFTC  fund  sources  for  bicycle  facilities  are  very  limited  and
highly  competitive.  However,  funding through  the  NYS
Coordinated  Funding Application  process  or  other  sources  may
prove  to  be  viable  for  bicycle  projects  until  such  time  as
transportation  funds  through  A/GFTC  are  increased.
Complete Streets/Integration  with  other  transportation
projects.  Given the  current  funding  restrictions  facing  all
aspects  of  transportation,  combining  vehicle  and  bicycle
improvements  in  the  same  project  may  be the  most  efficient
and  effective  course  of  action.  Since  New  York State  recently
enacted  Complete  Streets  legislation  (see  page  20),  it  is  likely
that  bicycle  facilities  will  become  a  more  prominent  element  in
the  design  and  construction  of  roadways  at  the  St at

e and
County  level.  In  addition,  there  may  be opportunities  to  create
or  improve  a  bicycle  facility  during  a local  roadway  or bridge
project  in  the  future,  regardless  of  the  priority  level assigned
as  a part  of  this  plan.  Local  agencies  should  tak e
adv a
ntage of
these  opportunities  as  they  arise.
Target  Cyclist.  Cyclists  can  span  a  wide  range  of experience
levels  and  skill.  Experienced  cyclists  may  feel more
comfortable  using certain  types  of  bicycle  facilities  than  do
children  or less‐experienced  adults.  This  plan  does  not
differentiate  between  types  of  cyclists,  as  the  goal  is  to
encourage  cycling  for  everyone.  However,  the desire  to
accommoda t
e  a  wide  range  of  cy

clists  should  be  balanced  with
the  benefits  of  providing  a facility  where  none  currently  exists,
even  if  the  facility  may  not be  the  most  comfortable  for every
cyclist.  This balance  should be  informed  by  factors  such  as
proximate  land  uses,  location  of  the  proposed  facility, and
physical  constraints  of  the  roadway/trail  area.

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
16
16

To
further  facilitate  the  decision ‐making process,  a Bicycle  Facility
Improvement  Process  has  been  developed.  The first  step  in  that
process  is  to  select  the  appropriate  Design Standards  for  the
roadway  in question.  Not  every  roadway  will require  a  dedicated
bicycle  facility.  Roads  with  very  low  traffic  volumes,  for  example,
may  operate  adequately  as  bicycle  fa cili
ties without  any  physical
alterations.  The  next  step  is  to  determine  how additional
improvements,  if required,  can  be  funded  and  constructed.  The
flow  chart  on  page  17  is intended  to help  guide  this  process.
Factors  such  as  existing  pavement  width,  the  feasibility  of  off‐road
connections,  and  available  funding progr a
ms are  all  considered.
This  process  anticipates  that  most  roadway  owners  would  require
that  bicycle  facilities  are  largely  consistent  with  the  design
standards  prior  to  designation  as a bike  route;  however,  this  is  not
prerequisite.  The designation  itself  may  be an internal  process,  or
may  be at  the  be hest
of  a  separate  gro
up. For  example,  the
WCS&QBO  recently  petitioned  the  Town  of  Queensbury  to
designate  several  roadways  as  bike  routes;  the  Town  Board  passed
a  resolution  designating  the  roadways  as  this  plan  was  being
drafted.  This  process  could  be  replicated  for any  town  in  the  A/
GFTC  region.  Similarly,  this  group,  or  any  local  m uni
ci
pality, may
choose  to  petition  roadway  owners to  designate  their  roadways  as
bike  routes.
New  York State  maintains  a  separate  system of  bike  routes,
designed  to  encourage  long ‐distance  connections  across  the state.
However,  local  bike  route  signage  may  be added  along  State
roadways  with  appropriate  permit s and  mainte
nance agreements.
An  example  of  this  is  the  Saratoga  County  Heritage  Trail,  which  is
located  along NYS  Routes  9  and  197  in the  Town  of  Moreau.
Is a dedicated bicycle
Is a
dedicated bicycle
facility needed?
facility
needed?

Unless
prohibited  by  law,  bicycles  are
allowed  to travel  on  any  public  roadway.
Although  the  focus  of  this  plan  is  on
providing  facilities which  will  make  bicycle
travel  safer  and  more  comfortable,  there
are  situations  in which  an  existing  roadway
may  represent  an  adequate  facility  for
bicycles,  without  the  need  for  a  dedicated
facility  such  as  a  bike  lane.
These  i

nclude:
Minor roads  with  low  traffic  volumes  (>
1,000  vehicles  per  day)
Low‐speed  roads, such  as  within
neighborhoods
Rural roadways  with  adequate  sight
distance
Roadways  with  no  history  of  bicycle
accidents
Off
Off
‐
‐
Road Facilities
Road
Facilities

In
some  cases, there  may  be an opportunity
to  provide  an  off‐road  facility,  such  as  a
multi ‐use  trail.  This  option  usually  requires
acquisition  of right‐of ‐way, which  drives
costs  up.  However,  given that  multi ‐use
trails  can  sometimes  be  funded  through
alternative  grant  sources  (see  page  33), it
may  someti
mes  be  more  feasible  to
provide  an  off

‐road  connection  than  to
improve  a  roadway.  However,  the  potential
for  increased  costs  and  decreased
connectivity  must  be  weighed  in  this
decision.

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
17
17

START:
For  all proposed  bicycle  routes,  determine   whether  dedicated/
improved  bicycle facilities  are  warranted  and  desirable*
Ye s  No
Can  the  bicycle  facility  be  created  through  re ‐striping,
roadway  stencils, or  shared ‐lane markings?
Pavement  Width
Alteration  Needed
Is the  roadway  scheduled  for  re ‐paving  or  other  capital
improvement  which  involves  re ‐striping  the  roadway?
Restripe roadway  as  part  of
preservation  project
Designate  roadway  as a Bike
Route;  add  signage
Ensure facility  will  be
maintained,  if  necessary
Pursue funding  for multi‐ use trail
through  TAP,  MTC,  or CF  funding
Ensure facility  will  be  maintained,  if
necessary
Acquire ROW  (if  needed)  and
construct  trail
Could  an off‐ road  facility  feasibly  be
substituted?*
Pursue funding  for capital
improvement  through  TAP, STP,
MTC,  or CF  funding
Construct  facility
Designate  roadway  as a Bike
Route;  add  signage
Is there  a  demonstrated  history  of
bicycle  accidents?
Pursue funding  for capital
improvement  through  HSIP funding
Construct  HSIP  project
Designate  roadway  as a Bike  Route;
add  signage
Designate  roadway  as a
Bike  Route;  add signage
Ye s  No
Ye s  No
Ye s  No
*Note:  See sidebar  on page  16

Key:
TAP =  Transportation  Alternatives Program
STP  = Surface  Transportation  Program (for
Beyond  Preservation  projects)
MTC  = Make  the Connection  Program
CF  = NYS  Consolidated  Funding Solicitation
HSIP  = Highway  Safety Improvement  Program
Ye s
No

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
18
18

Other Bicycle Improvements
There
are many  opportunities  to  pursue  small‐scale  improvements
which  could  also  improve  the  biking  experience  in  the  A/GFTC
region.  These “spot”  improvements  address  issues which  may  not
require  significant  funding  to  complete.  Several  examples  are
included  below.
Drainage grate pattern
The direction  of  the  grating  pattern on  storm  drains  is  an  often ‐
overlooked  detail. Grate openings  which  run  parallel  to  the  travel
direction  can cause  havoc  for  thin  bicycle  tires.  Ideally,  grates
should  feature  a  “bike ‐friendly”  pattern.  If  this  is  not  feasible,  the
grate  should  be  situated  so  that  the  pattern  r
uns  p erpendi
cular to
the  travel  direction.
Individual hazards
Potholes,  cracks,  and sudden  changes  in  grade  near  utility  access
points  and  drainage  grates  can  be  difficult  for cyclists  to  maneuver,
especially  at  night.  In the  short  term,  pavement  markings  as
specified  in  Chapter  9C  of  the  MUTCD  can help  alert cyclists  that  a
potentially  hazardous  condition  exists.  These  hazards  can  the n
be
eliminated  or  mini mized  as  the  appropri

ate  roadway  or utility
project  is  undertaken  in  the  future.
Pavement overlays
Even if no  re ‐striping  or  widening  is called  for in a  paving  project,
there  may  still be  good  opportunities  to  improve  conditions  for
cyclists.   Ensuring  that  the  seam  of  the  pavement  is  properly
feathered  and  does  not  occur  in the  middle  of  the  shoulder,  will
provide  a  smooth,  regular  surface  for cyclists.

Roadway sweeping
Patches of  gravel,  especially  on corners,  can  pose  a  threat  to
cyclists.  With  the  help  of  the  cycling  community,  it  may  be  possible
to  identify  areas  where  significant  gravel  accumulation  is
hampering  safe  cycling.  Targeted  road  sweeping  can  help  to
reduce  the  potential  hazards.
Bicycle Racks
Although  some  communities  require  provision  of bicycle  racks
during  project  development  approval,  it can  still  be  difficult  for
cyclists  to  find  a  safe  place  to  lock  their  bike. Bike  racks  should  be
provided  near  public  buildings  such  as  schools,  municipal  centers,
and  post  offices,  as well  as in public  parking  areas.  Co mmercial

businesses  an d e

mployment  centers can  also  provide  bike  racks  as
a  service  to  their  customers  and employees.
Top: Grate  pattern  not  bike ‐
friendly
Bottom:  Bike ‐friendly  grate
(photos  courtesy  of  ped‐
bikeimages.org)
Above: MUTCD   standard  for  individual  hazard  striping
Existing  pavement
Existing pavement
Overlay
Overlay
Travel
Lane  Shoulder
Pavement  Overlay  Placement—NOT  Recommended
Pavement  Overlay  Placement—Recommended
Travel Lane  Shoulder

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
19
19

PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS
Although
creating  and maintaining  dedicated infrastructure  is  often  the  primary  goal
when  considering  pedestrian issues,  reducing  barriers  can also  make  a  positive  impact.
Typical  barriers  to pedestrian  transportation  include inadequate  space,  facilities  that  fail
to  connect  logical termini,  and  the  proliferation  of  land  use  patterns  and  street  designs
that  emphasize  motor  vehicle  travel.  High  traffic  and  tru c
k volumes  also  can  deter
pedestrian  mobility.
Within  the  A/GFTC  area,  there  are a  variety  of  pedestrian  issues  to  address.  The  City  of
Glens  Falls  and  most  of  the  area’s  villages  and  hamlets  were  built  prior  to the  automobile
era.  In  these  downtown  areas,  the  primary  emphasis  should  be  on  maintaini
ng an
d
preserving  the sidewalk  networks  that  already  exist,  particularly  along  major  streets  and
near  schools,  parks, and  commercial  districts.  The  second  priority  is  to  consider
pedestrian ‐motorist  interaction  at intersections  and  major  destination  points.  Finally,
where  warranted,  connections  need  to be  established  between  existing  pedestrian
facilities  and  areas  of new  developmen t.
In

some  of the  region’s  suburban  areas,  the  pedestrian  provisions  are  not  sufficient  to
meet  demand.  Commercial  areas  are often  designed  as  a singular  destination  and  do  not
include  connections  to  adjacent  developments.  In these  areas,  the  emphasis  should  be  on
establishing  a  continuous  pedestrian  network  t h
rou
ghout  commercial  developments.
New  residential  developments  should  anticipate  and  consider  pedestrian  activity.  Where
demand  exists,  improvements  should  be  made  to  connect  separated  neighborhoods  with
one  another.
Much  of  the  A/GFTC  region  is  rural.  Although  these  areas  are not  often  associated  with
heavy  pedestrian  activity,  there  is  nonetheless  a  need  to  en sure
safe,  accessibl e
accommoda

tion,  especially  near  clusters  of  pedestrian  generators  and  destinations.
Roadway  lighting, shoulder  width,  crosswalks,  and small ‐scale  infrastructure
improvements  can  all  be  key  to  making  sure  that,  when  people  walk  in  the  rural  areas,
they  can  do  so  safely  and  comfortably.
Pedestrian Facilities: Policies and Legislation
There are several  federal,  state,  and  local  laws  and  policies  which  affect  the  provision,
location,  and  design  of  pedestrian  facilities.
The Americans with Disabilities Act
The Americans  with  Disabilities  Act  of  1990  (ADA)  prohibits  discrimination  on  the  basis  of
disability.  Under  ADA,  buildings  and  facilities  are  to  be  designed  and  constructed  to
provide  accessibility  to  people with  disabilities.  This  law  applies  to  State  and  local
government  facilities  as  well  as  places  of  public  accommodations.   In general,  AD A
focuses
mainly  on  bui lding  faciliti

es  and  on  sites,  such as  parking  lots.  ADA  addresses  certain
features  common  to  public  sidewalks,  such as  curb  ramps.  These  standards  are  applied  to
construction  or  alteration  of  buildings  and  facilities.

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
20
20

The
standards  used  by NYSDOT  for  the design  and  construction  of
all  Department  projects  are  prescribed  within  the  Americans  with
Disabilities  Act  Accessibility  Guidelines  for  Buildings  and  Facilities
(ADAAG).  NYSDOT  requires  that all  pedestrian ‐related
improvements  conform  to  ADAAG  standards.
Transition Plans
To implement  ADA, most public  agencies  are  required  to complete
a  transition  plan.  This  is  intended  to  set  forth  the  agency’s  plan  for
bringing  public  facilities,  including  sidewalks,  into  compliance  with
federal  pedestrian  design  standards.  Transition  plans  can  reduce
liability  related  to ADA  non ‐compliance  claims,  as  long  as  the
agency  is  in  the  process  of  impl
eme n
ting the  plan.  Elements  of  the
plan  include  an inventory  of physical  conditions,   the  methods  that
will  be  used  to  make  the facilities  accessible;  the schedule  for
upgrading  pedestrian  access;  and   naming  the  official  responsible
for  implementation  of  the  plan.
A/GFTC  is  committed  to  assisting  municipalities  with  the  creatio n

and  implementation  of  transition  plans.  Technical  assistance  is
available  to perform  data  collection,  such  as  for  the required
inventory  of physical  obstacles,  which may  be difficult  for  a local
municipality  to  perform  on  its  own.  In  addition,  funding  programs
such  as  the  Make  The  Connection  grants,  can be  us ed
to bring
facilities  in t

o  compliance  with ADA,  thereby  implementing
transition  plans  in  the  local  municipality.
Public Right‐of‐Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG)
Sidewalks, street crossings,  and  other  elements  in  the  public  right ‐
of ‐way  can  pose  specific  challenges  to  accessibility,  which  may  not
be  fully  addressed  in ADA.  As  such,  in  2011,  the  Architectural  and
Transportation  Barriers  Compliance  Board issued  further  guidance
to  address  conditions  and  constraints  unique  to  public  rights‐of‐
way.  This  incl udes
access  for  blind  ped e
strians at  street  crossings,
wheelchair  access to on ‐street  parking,  and  various  constraints
posed  by  space  limitations,  roadway  design practices,  slope,  and
terrain.  The  new  guidelines  will  cover  pedestrian  access  to
sidewalks  and  streets,  including  crosswalks,  curb ramps,  street
furnishings,  pedestrian  signals,  parking,  and  other  components  of
publi c
rights ‐of ‐

way.  These  guidelines  are  anticipated  to be
adopted  as  standards  in  November  2014.
Pedestrian
Pedestrian

Accessibility and
Accessibility
and
Roadway Alterations
Roadway
Alterations

Both
ADA  and PROWAG  are  triggered  by  either
construction  or  alteration  projects.  In
transportation  terms,  the  definition  of
“alteration”  is  an  important  consideration.
According  to  joint  Department  of  Justice/US
Department  of  Transportation  technical
assistance,   alteration  is  defined  as  “a  change
that  affects  or  could  affect  the  usability  of  all
or  part  of  a  building  or  fa
cil i
ty. Alterations  of
streets,  roads,  or  highways  include  activities
such as  reconstruction,  rehabilitation,
resurfacing, widening,  and  projects  of  similar
scale and  effect.”Examples  include,  but  are  not
limited  to:  addition  of  a  new  layer  of  asphalt,
reconstruction,  concrete  pavement
rehabilitation  and  reconstruction,  open‐graded
surface  course,  micro‐surfacing  and  thin  lift
overlays,  cape  seals,  and  in ‐place  asphalt
recycling.  Since  resurfacing  of  streets
constitutes  an  alteration,  it  triggers  the
obligation  to  provide  curb ra
mps  if  it  in v
olves
work  on  a  street  or roadway  spanning  from
one  intersection  to  another,  and  includes
overlays  of  additional  material  to  the  road
surface,  with  or  without  milling.
Maintenance  activities, such  as  filling  potholes,
joint  crack  repairs,  crack  filling  and  sealing,  or
pavement  patching,  do  not  constitute  an
alteration.
For  more  details  concern
ing   ro

adway
alterations  and ADA,  see:
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/civilrights/
programs/doj_fhwa_ta.cfm

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
21
21

Complete
Streets Legislation and Policies
Governor  Andrew  M.  Cuomo  signed  the  Complete  Streets  Act  (Chapter
398,  Laws  of  New  York)  on  August  15, 2011,  requiring  state,  county  and
local  agencies  to  consider  the  convenience  and mobility  of  all  users  when
developing  transportation  projects that  receive  state  and  federal  funding.
The  New  York State  Department  of  Transportation  (NYSDOT) is  wo rking  to
ensure  that  its  policies  and  proced

ures  meet  the  new  standards.  The
initiative  presents  an  opportunity  to  expand  upon existing  programs  and
collaborate  with  bicyclists,  pedestrians,  people with disabilities  and  others
to  identify  best  practices  and  designs  for  transportation  facilities.
It  is  important  to  note  that  the  Complete  Streets  le
gislation applies  to
planning,  design,  construction,   reconstruction,   and   rehabilitation
projects.  Resurfacing,  maintenance,  or  pavement  recycling  projects  are
exempt  from  the  law.  In  addition,  the  law  only  requires  that  Complete
Street  elements  be  considered  during  project  development;  the  law  does
not  guarantee  that  design  elements  will  be  included  in  the  finished
project.  Spec i

fically,  the  law  does  not  apply  when  the  any  of the  following
conditions  are  met:
use  by   bicyclists  and  pedestrians  is  prohibited  by  law,  such  as  within
interstate  highway  corridors;
the cost  would  be  disproportionate  to  the  need  as   determined   by
factors   including,  but  not  limited  to, the  following:  land  use  context,
current  and  projected  traffic  volumes,  and  population  density
(  Typically,  excessively  disproportionate  is  defined  as  exceeding  20%
of  the  cost  of  the  larger  transportation  project,  but  it should  be
determined  on  a  proje c
t‐
by‐project  basis);
demonstrated  lack  of  need  as  determined  by   factors,   including,  but
not   limited   to,   land  use,  current  and  projected  traffic  volumes,
including  population  density,  or  demonstrated  lack  of   community
support;
use of  the  design  features  would  have an  adverse  impact  on,  or  be
contrary  to, public  safety.
Local Complete Streets Policies
In addition  to the  New  York  State  legislation,  a  number  of  local
municipalities  have  passed  Complete  Streets  policies.  These  policies  range
in  applicability  from  statements  which  support  Complete  Streets
principles,  to  revisions  in  local  land  use  codes  which  mandate  Complete
Street  design  features.  The  current  list  of  local  Complete  Streets  policies  is
shown  at  lef t
.
 Complete Streets
Complete
Streets

A
Complete  Street  is  a  roadway
which  accommodates  safe,
convenient  access  and mobility  of
all  roadway  users of  all  ages  and
abilities.  This  includes  pedestrians,
bicyclists,  public  transportation
riders,  and motorists;  it  includes
children,  the  elderly,  and persons
with  disabilities.
Complete  Street   design  features
include  sidewalks,  lane striping,
bicycle  lanes,  paved  shoulders
suitable  for  use  by  bicycl
ists,
signage,  crosswalks,  pedestrian
control  si

gnals,  bus  pull ‐outs,  curb
cuts,  raised  crosswalks,  ramps and
traffic  calming  measures.

Municipalities with Complete
Streets Policies
City  of  Glens  Falls
Town  of  Warrensburg
Village of  Lake  George
Village &  Town  of  Fort  Edward
Town of  Lake  Luzerne
Town of  Queensbury
Village of  Hudson  Falls
Town  of  Greenwich
Town of  Kingsbury
Town of  Johnsburg

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
22
22

Pedestrian Design Features
The
presence  of  an  adequate  and  interconnected  pedestrian
network  can  reduce  the  number  of  trips  that  need  to be  made
with  a  vehicle,  thus  reducing  traffic  congestion,  noise,  and
pollution.  As  with  bicycle  facilities,  there are a  number  of  design
features  intended  to  promote  the  safety  and  comfort  of
pedestrians.  New  innovations  and  design  featur es co
ntinue to  be
developed  as  communities  seek  ways  to  make  the  pedestrian
environment  safer  and  more  inviting.
Sidewalks
As the  key  component  of  urban  pedestrian  circulation  systems,
functional  and accessible  sidewalks enrich  the  quality  of  life  in a
community.  Besides  providing  a transportation  function,  sidewalks
can  also  serve  as  a desirable  design element,  contributing  to  the
character  and strengthening  the  identity  of  a  community.
Sidewalks  are  the  most  common  form  of  pedestrian  facility  in
urbanize d
areas.  Although  most  peop le are  familiar  with  the
concre

te  walkways  found  in  city  and  village  settings,  there  are  a
number  of  design  considerations  which  should  be  taken  into
account  for sidewalk  projects.  These  include:
Sidewalk  width.  The mandated  minimum  width  for  sidewalks
can,  in  certain  limited  circumstances,  be  as  narrow  as 4′,
although  5 ‐6′  sidewalks  are  more  common  and  appropriate  for
neighborhood  environments.  Sidewalks  of  8 ‐12′  in  width  may
be  desirable  in  certain  environments,  especially busy
commercial  areas. This  extra  width  can  accommodate  the
heavier  pe destrian
traffic. A  wider  sidewalk  can  also  contri
bute
to  an  active,  vibrant community  setting,  by  serving  as  outdoor
seating/retail  display  area.
Landscaping/buffer  area.  To increase  the  feeling  of  security,  a
buffer  area  is  often  included  between  the  walkway  and  street.
This  strip  can  be  landscaped  or paved,  and  also  provides  space
for  street  lights,  utility  poles,  trees,  and other  amenities  like
benches,  signage,  and  mailboxes.  If  this  area  is  to  contain
landscaping,  it  is  crucial  th at
enough  soil  volume  is  pr ovided  to
maintain  th

e  health  of  plant  material  as  well  as to prevent
pavement  buckling.  For  sidewalk  buffers  that  are  to  contain
street  trees,  a minimum  width  of  6′  is  recommended.  The
planting  area  can  be  finished  with  turf,  gravel  or  mulch,  or
pavement  types  which  allow  water to  percolate  into  the soil,
Above:  Traditional  concrete  sidewalk  with wide landscaped  buffer.  Photo  courtesy
of  pedbikeimages.org

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
23
23

such
as  permeable  pavement  or  concrete  bricks. Solid,  non ‐
permeable  pavement is  not  recommended  for  use over  street
tree  buffers  unless  structural  soil  or  other  methods  are  used  to
promote  tree  root  health  and  prevent  pavement  buckling.
Paving material. Concrete  is the  most  common  material  used
for  sidewalks,  and  is  generally  recommended  for  urbanized
environments.  However,  other  materials  can also  be  used,
provided  the  pavement  meets  PROWAG  standards  for  a  stable,
firm,  and  slip ‐resistant  surface.  Highly  textured  pavement,
such  as  stamped  concrete,  is recommended  only  as  an accent
material  and  should  not  be  used  as  a pr imary
materi al on
pedestrian  access  routes,  si

nce it  can  cause  difficulties  for
some  wheelchair  users.  Asphalt  is  not  generally  recommended
for  urbanized  environments,  especially  in  situations  in  which
the  asphalt  walkway  will adjoin  concrete  walkways  or  curbs,  as
this  combination  can  increase  maintenance  due  to  se ttling
of
the  pavement  ma terial.

However,  in more  suburban  or  rural
areas,  especially  adjacent  to  non ‐curbed  roads,  asphalt  may  be
an  adequate  alternative  sidewalk  material.
Sidewalk  replacement.  In many  cases,  a  project  involves
replacing  an  existing  sidewalk.  It is  important  to  consider  that
the  new  sidewalks  will  need  to meet  ADAAG  and  other
applicable  standards.   This  may  result  in  wider  sidewalks  or  a
different  paving  material  than  was  used  previously.  Existing
vegetation,  signage,  and  utilities  will  also  have  to  be  taken  into
account.
Sidewalk  retrofits.  When new  sidewalks  are  added  to  an
existing  roadway,  which commonly  occurs in  suburban  and
rural  environments,  other factors  come  into  play.  The  available
right‐of ‐way is  usually  the  most  important  consideration,  as
this  affects  the  sidewalk  width  and  location.  In  addition,  the
roadway  may have curbs  or  open  drainage,  which  affect  th e

placement  of  sidewalks.  In  suburban  and  rural  areas,  curbs  are
not  ty pically  used,  and  stormwater

runs  freely  to  the  side  of
the  road,  often  collected  in ditches  or  swales.  These
stormwater  features can  take  up a  large  portion  of the
available  right of  way,  which  reduces  the space  available  for
sidewalks.  In  addition,  it  can  be  costly  to  alter  the  slope,  width,
and  surface/s u
b‐

surface  material  of  swales,  adding to  the
potential  cost  of  sidewalk  projects.  Finally,  it  is  important  to
consider  that  installing  new  sidewalks  along  existing  roadways
may  be a  controversial  topic  for  adjacent  landowners.
What is Structural Soil?
What
is Structural Soil?

Structural
or  gap ‐graded  soil  is  a
mixture  of  sized  gravel  and  soil,
which  meets  both  engineering
requirements  for  load ‐bearing  as
well  as providing  soil volume  for
tree  root  growth.  This  mixture  can
be  used  under  pavement  to  provide
more  useable  space  for  trees  in
urban  environments.
Why use Structural Soil?
Why
use Structural Soil?

Trees
in  urban  environments  are
subject  to  a  number  of
environmental  stressors, including
deicing  salts,  soil and  air  pollution,
heat  loads,  and drought.  However,
the  most  significant  issue  is
inadequate  or  compacted  soil. In
addition  to  severely  limiting  the
health  of  the  tree  by  inhibiting  root
growth,  this  can  lead  to  shallow
root  pene tration,
which  ca uses
pavement  buc

kling.
Using  structural  soil  can  alleviate
these  conditions  by  providing
adequate  soil  for  tree  roots  to
penetrate.  In  turn,  this  creates  a
healthier  tree  and  reduces
maintenance  needs  for  adjacent
sidewalks  or  other  pavement.

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
24
24

Pedestrian
Crossings
Many pedestrian  trips  involve  a street  crossing  at  some  point,
whether  at an  intersection,  a  midblock  location,  or  a  commercial
drive  or  parking  area.  Unlike  sidewalks,  crossings are  spaces  shared
by  vehicles  and  pedestrians.  As  such,  the  potential  for  pedestrian/
vehicle  conflicts  is  much  higher  than  in  strictly  pedestrian  facilities.
There  are a  nu mber
of  cri t
eria to  consider  when  addressing  the
need  for  pedestrians  to  cross  vehicular  travel  lanes.  These  include
volumes  of  pedestrian  and  vehicle  traffic,  vehicular  speed,
intersection  configuration  and  sight  distances,  school zones,
facilities  and  services  for  the elderly,  and surrounding  land  use.
Although  most  crossings  are  located  at  intersections,  midblock
crossings  are  also  sometimes  called  for.  (Details  concerning  th e
specifics  of  crossing

warrants  are discussed  in  the  subsections
below.)  In  some  cases, such  as  low  volume  roadway  intersections,
there  may  be no  need  to provide  a  formal  pedestrian  crossing
treatment  at  all.  However,  in  many  urban  or commercial
environments,  formal  crossings  are  be n
eficial
or  necessary.  Safety
is  also  a  crucial  consideration.  Crossings  should  never  be  located  in
places  where  sight  distance  or  other  physical  conditions  would  put
pedestrians  at  risk.
Once  the  need  for a crossing  is  determined,  there  are  factors
which  influence  the  design  of  a  crossing.  Again,  in  very  general
terms,  the  main  considera t
ion

is  to  allow  pedestrians  to  cross  the
street  safely.  There  are many  options  which  affect  this  issue,
discussed  in greater  detail  below.   In  some  cases,  it  is  beneficial  or
necessary  to  combine  two or  more  of  the  potential  crossing
treatments.  Relevant  regulatory  guidance is note d
whe r
e
applicable.
Marked Crosswalks
The pedestrian  right‐of‐way  across  vehicular  travel  lanes  is  known
as  a crosswalk.  According  to AASHTO,  “An  intersection  crosswalk is
defined  as  the  extension  of  a  sidewalk  or  shoulder  across  an
intersection,  whether  it is  marked  or  not….  It  is  legal  for  a
pedestrian  to  cross  the  street  at  any  intersection,  ev en
if  no
crosswalk  is  marked,  unle

ss  crossing  is  specifically
prohibited.”  (AASHTO,  July  2004)  Pedestrians  and vehicles  must
follow  applicable  right ‐of‐way  requirements  in  these  locations,
regardless  of  whether  a crosswalk  is  defined  by  pavement
markings.
Above: Marked  crosswalk.  Stripes  have  been  located  to  avoid  wheel  paths, which
reduces  maintenance.  Photo  courtesy  of  pedbikeimages.org

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
25
25

In
many  cases,  it  is  beneficial  or necessary  to  provide  pavement
markings  or  other  treatments  which  designate  the  crosswalk
boundaries,  with  a  visual  and/or  tactile pavement  treatment.
Marked  crosswalks  can  help  channel  pedestrians  to  specific
locations  and  improve  pedestrian  access  and  safety  at  night,  while
serving  to  warn  motorists  of  the  potential  for interaction  with
pedestrians.  However,  ma rked  crossings  can  also  cr

eate a false
sense  of  security  for  pedestrians,  who  may  assume  that the
crosswalk  markings  guarantees  motorist  compliance  with  right  of
way  regulations.
A  number  of  factors  must  be  considered,  prior to  installing  a
marked  crosswalk,  including  volumes  of  pedestrian  and vehicle
traffic,  vehi cular
speed,  in te

rsection  configuration  and  sight
distances,  school zones,  facilities  and  services  for  the elderly,  and
surrounding  land  use.   NYSDOT  sets  guidelines  for  state ‐owned
roads,  and  notes  that  marked  crosswalks  should  be  considered  at
the  following:  (NYSDOT,  2013)
Locations  that  feature  pedestrian ‐actuated traffic signals
Established  school  crossings
Traffic signals  located  within  central  business  districts  or  other
areas  where  crossing  pedestrian  volumes  are  significant
Areas that feature  development  on  both  sides  of  a  highway,
resulting  in  concentrated  pedestrian  volumes  crossing  the
highway  where no  intersection  exists
Signal ‐controlled  entrances to  commercial  properties
Curb Ramps and Blended Transitions
According to the  most  recent  guidelines  for  pedestrian  facilities  in
the  ROW,  curb  ramps,  blended  transitions,  or a  combination  of
curb  ramps  and  blended  transitions  must  connect  the  pedestrian
access  routes at  each  pedestrian  street  crossing.  Typically,  two
curb  ramps  are  provided  at  each  street  corner—one  for each
crosswalk.  In  places  where  existing  ph ysic
al constrai
nts prevent
two  curb  ramps  from being  installed,  a  single  diagonal  curb ramp  is
permitted.  However,  single diagonal  ramps can  be  confusing  for
the  visually  impaired,  as  the  curb  ramp  is  not  entirely  aligned to
the  crosswalk.  This  lack  of  directionality  could  create  a situation
where  pedestrians  walk dia gonally
into  the  in tersecti
on, rather
than  into  the  crosswalk.  As  such,  diagonal  ramps should  be  used
only  where  no  other  option  is  feasible.  Detectable  warnings are  to
be  employed  as required  (see  sidebar).
Detectable Wa r n in g s
Detectable Wa r n in g s

Detectable
warning  surfaces  consist of  small
truncated  domes  built  in  or  applied  to  a
walking  surface  that are  detectable
underfoot,  and  are  intended  for  pedestrians
who  are blind  or  have  low  vision.  On
pedestrian  access  routes,  detectable  warning
surfaces  indicate  the  boundary  between  a
pedestrian  route  and a  vehicular  route
where  there is  a  flush  rather  th
an  a
curbed
connection.  As such,  under  PROWAG,  they
are  required  to  be  installed  at  the  following
locations  on pedestrian  access  routes:
1.  Curb  ramps  and  blended  transitions  at
pedestrian  street  crossings;
2.  Pedestrian  refuge  islands;
3.  Pedestrian  at ‐grade  rail  crossings  not
located  within  a  street  or high way;
There

are  also  requirements  for  detectable
warnings  at  transit  boarding  stations  (See
PROWAG  for  more  details).
In  addition  to  providing  a  tactile  cue,
detectable  warning  surfaces  must  have  a
color  contrast  from the  surrounding
pavement  (light ‐on ‐dark  or  dark‐ on‐light).
Dark  Gray  is  the  default  color,  as  it  provides
good  contrast  with  portla

nd  cement
concrete  sidewalks  and  is  widely  available.
White  or  Safety  Yellow  are recommended
colors  for use  on  asphalt  concrete  or  other
dark  surfaces.  For  more  information  on
appropriate  colors for detectable  warning
surfaces,  see  NYSDOT  Highway  Design
Manual,  chapter  18.

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
26
26

Midblock
Crosswalks
Where there  is  significant  pedestrian crossing  demand,  crosswalks
can  also  be  marked  at  midblock  locations.  AASHTO  has  included  a
checklist  of  criteria  for  considering  a midblock  crossing:  (AASHTO,
July  2004)
The location  is  already  a source  of  a  substantial  number  of
midblock  crossings.
Where a  new  development  is  anticipated  to  generate  midblock
crossings.
The lane  use  is  such  that  pedestrians  are  highly  unlikely  to
cross  the  street  at  the  next  intersection.
The safety  and  capacity  of  adjacent  intersections  or  large
turning  volumes  create  a situation  where it  is  difficult  to  cross
the  street.
Spacing  between  adjacent  intersections  exceeds  200m  (600ft).
The vehicular  capacity of  the  roadway  may not be  substantially
reduced  by  the  midblock  crossing.
Adequate  sight  distance  for  both  pedestrians  and  motorists.
Since  motorists  are  more  likely  to expect  pedestrians  at
intersections,  midblock crossings  require  special considerations
above  and  beyond  pavement  markings.   Midblock  crossings  should
always  be  used  in conjunction  with  pavement  markings  and
warning  signs  that  concur  with  the  standards  of  the  MUTCD.
Additional  tr eatments
such  as  raised
crosswalks  and  HAWK  signals
are  discussed  in  greater  detail  below.
Care  must  be  taken  when  locating  midblock  crossings.  Defining  too
many  locations  where  pedestrians  are  encouraged  to  cross
roadways  can  cause  unwanted  motor  vehicle  circulation  delays
and  be  counterproductive  to the  aim  of  channeling  pedestrian
traffic.  Overuse  of  pavement  markings  also  may  lead to  a  ge neral

disrespect  of  intended  crossing  facili

ties by  motorists.
It  is  also  important  to  consider  pedestrian  behavior.  Many
pedestrians  will  cross  the  street  mid‐ block  whether  a  formal
crosswalk  is  provided  or  not,  if  the  perception  of  convenience  and
safety  is  sufficient.  In  certa in
cases,  it  may  be  necess
ary to  install
features  that  discourage  pedestrians  from  crossing  mid‐block  ,
such  as  areas  with  inadequate  sight  distance  or  other  safety
concerns.  Although  rarely  needed,  vegetation,  fencing,  or  other
barriers  may  be installed  to  channel  pedestrians  to  appropriate
crossing  locations.
Above: Midblock  crossing  with  refuge  island and  signage.  Photo  courtesy  of  ped‐
bikeimages.org

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
27
27

Curb Extensions

Curb extensions,  also  known  as  neck‐ downs  or  bulbouts,  are
designed  to  minimize  pedestrian  exposure  to  traffic  by  creating
shorter  crossing  distances.  Curb  extensions  can  also  increase  the
likelihood  that  a pedestrian  wanting  to  cross  will  be  seen  in
addition  to  improving  visibility of traffic  for  the pedestrian  by
allowing  the  pedestrian  to  safely  move  beyond  a row  of  parked
cars  before  crossing.   These features  also  serve  to  cal m traffic,  by
reduci

ng  visual  width  of  the  street  (for  midblock  crossings)  or
tightening  the turning  radii  of  the  intersection.  The  Highway
Design  Manual  recommends  that  curb  extensions  be  used  only  on
low‐ speed  streets  that  fe atu
re parking  lanes.  (NYSDOT,  2013)  Used
in  absence  of  parking  lanes,  curb  extensions  can  create  conflict
with  motor  vehicle  traffic  and  bicyclists,  and  also  can  complicate
transit  operations.
Curb  extensions  are  associated  with certain  infrastructure  and
maintenance  issues.  The  drainage  patterns  of  a  roadway  can be
changed  by creating  cur
b exte nsions,  which  may
require  additional
stormwater  infrastructure.  This  is  especially  important  to  consider
in  cases  where  the  extensions  are  installed  independently  of  a
larger  roadway  reconstruction.  Curb extensions  are  also
sometimes  controversial  because  of  a  perceived  conflict  with  snow
removal.  Although  curb  extensions  do  require  some
accommodation  on  the  part  of  mai nte
nance  crews,  the  impa
cts
can  be  minimized  through careful design.
Refuge Islands
Another way  to  reduce  crossing  distances  is  to  incorporate
pedestrian  refuge  islands.  Refuge  islands are  appropriate  where it
may  be difficult  for  pedestrians  to  cross  the  entire  roadway  all at
once.  Refuge  islands  allow  pedestrians  to  cross  one  segment  of  the
roadway  at a  time  by  providing  a safe  location  (removed  from
travel  lanes)  at  an  i nter
m

ediate  point within  the roadway  crossing.
Islands  may  be defined  by  paint,  curbs,  guideposts,  and  other
devices.  These  facilities  are  appropriate  in  environments  that
feature  50  ft  (15m)  or  wider  crossings  or  more  than  four  travel
lanes.  At  unsignalized  crossing  locations,  refuge  islands  can
actually  reduce ped estrian
crossing  times  by  allowing  for
one
direction  of traffic  to  be  negotiated  at  a  time,  potentially
shortening  the  time  between  gaps  in  traffic.  Refuge  islands  must
be  accessible  to  all  pedestrians,  and are  ideally  designed  with an  at
‐grade  crosswalk  passage  (as opposed  to a  ramp)  to  aid  those
users  with  dis a
bilities.

Minimizing winter
Minimizing
winter
maintenance conflicts
maintenance
conflicts

One
common  objection  to curb
extensions  is  the  perception  of
increased  burden  on  winter
maintenance  crews.  In  addition  to
careful  design of the  width  and
geometry  of  the  bulbout,  the
potential  for  conflicts  with
snowplows  can  be  minimized
through  a  variety  of  methods,
including:
Flush curbs and  /or  pavement
Tapered front  ends
Vertical  delineators  to  alert
snowplow  operators to  lift  their
blades  if  needed
In  addition  to conscientious  design,
additional  training  for  maintenance
crews  may  be  beneficial.
Above: Landscaped  refuge  island. Photo  courtesy  of pedbikeimages.org

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
28
28

Raised
Crosswalks
In certain  locations,  raised  crosswalks  can  serve  to  slow  traffic  and
increase  pedestrian  visibility.  By  extending  the  crossing  at  the
same  grade as  the  adjacent  sidewalks,  the  raised  crosswalk  acts  as
a  speed  hump. This  type  of facility  must  be  installed  in  conjunction
with  a  marked  crosswalk  and  is  suitable  only  for  low‐speed  local
streets  which  are  not  emergency  routes.   In addition,  if  the  raised
crosswalk  is  i

nstalled  independently  of  a  larger  roadway  project,
drainage  and stormwater  collection may  be  impacted.
Traffic Signals
Pedestrian  signals  are  traffic  signals  which  indicate  when  it is
appropriate  to cross  the  street.  There  are  two  main  types of
pedestrian  signals:  fixed‐time  and pedestrian  actuated.  In  fixed ‐
time  signals,  the  pedestrian  phasing  is pre ‐timed  and runs
concurrently  with  the  vehicular  signal.  The pedestrian  walk/don’t
walk  signal  indications  are  therefore  automatically  displayed  in
conjunction  with  the  gree n signal  for

vehicles.  These  types of
signals  are  appropriate  at intersections  where  the  existing  signal
phasing  provides  ample  opportunity  for  pedestrians  to  cross  the
street.
Pedestrian ‐actuated signals  alter  the  timing  of  the  traffic  light to
accommodate  pedestrian  activity,  either  by  advancing  th e
signal
phase  cy cle,  in

creasing  the  green  time  of the  light,  or  providing
brief  all‐red  phases  to reduce  conflicts  with  vehicle  turning
movements.  Actuation  of these  signals  is  most  commonly  achieved
through  a  pushbutton.  However,  research indicates that  many
pedestrians  ignore  the  button  or believe  that the button  is
malfunctioni n
g if  ther

e  is a  significant  delay (Hughes,  2001).
AASHTO  notes  that  pushbutton  usage  can  be  as  low  as 25‐33%.
Automated  pedestrian  detection  devices  use  microwave  or
infrared  technology  to  sense  waiting  pedestrians  and  then  send  a
signal  to  switch  to  a  pedestrian  WALK  phase  automatically.  These
devices  have  been  shown  to  significan t
ly  reduce  the  nu
mber of
vehicle‐ pedestrian  conflicts  at  intersections.  (Hughes, 2001)
It  is  also  important  to  consider  the  needs  of  the  vision ‐impaired.
Accessible  pedestrian  signals  use  audible  or  tactile  methods  to
transmit  the  WALK  signal  to  vision ‐impaired  pedestrians.   These
are  most  helpful  in  locations  where  th e
sounds  of  par a
llel or
perpendicular  traffic  do  not  provide  sufficient  audible  cues,  such  as
midblock  crossings or  other  locations.
Pedestrian Hybrid
Pedestrian
Hybrid
Beacons
Beacons

The
pedestrian  hybrid beacon  (also  known  as
the  High  intensity  Activated  crossWalK  (or
HAWK))  is  a  pedestrian ‐activated  warning
device  which  can  be  used  at  midblock
pedestrian  crossings.   The pedestrian  hybrid
beacon  is  an  intermediate  option  between  the
operational  requirements  and  effects  of  a
rectangular  rapid  flash  beacon  and  a  full
pedestrian  signal.  It  provid
es a  positive  stop
control  in  are

as  without  the  high  pedestrian
traffic  volumes  that typically  warrant  the
installation  of  a  signal.
Pedestrian  hybrid  beacons  should  only  be  used
in  conjunction  with  a  marked  crosswalk.  In
general,  they  are  appropriate  for locations  in
which  gaps  in  traffic  are  not  ad
equate  to  per m
it
pedestrians  to  cross,  if  vehicle  speeds on  the
major  street  are  too  high  to  permit  pedestrians
to  cross,  or  if  pedestrian  delay  is  excessive.
Currently,  pedestrian  hybrid beacons  are  not
widely  deployed  in  New  York  State.  Since  this  is
a  still ‐unfamiliar  traffic  control  device  to  many,
extensive  educational  out r

each  to  the  public  is
needed  prior  to  implementation,  to  reduce
confusion  for  drivers  and  pedestrians.

Above: Raised  crosswalk.  Photo  courtesy  of pedbikeimages.org

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
29
29

Multi
‐Use Paths
The discussion  for  pedestrian  facilities  is  usually  focused  on
sidewalks  and  pedestrian  crossings.  However,  in some
environments,  the  most  appropriate  pedestrian facility  is  a  multi ‐
use  path.  These  facilities  can  provide  travel  options  for  cyclists  and
pedestrians  and  are  not  necessarily  dependent on the  road
network.  This  can  be  useful  in  rural  and  suburban  env ironments
where  the  roads  do  not  le

nd  themselves  to  a  traditional  curb  and
sidewalk  treatment.  (See  page  12  for  discussion  about  the  design
of  multi ‐use paths.)  Multi ‐use  paths  are  also  desirable  to  many
cyclists  and  pedestrians  because  vehicle  use  is  restricted.
Pedestrian Facilities in Suburban and Rural
Environments
Sidewalks and  other  pedestrian  facilities are  often  provided  as  a
matter  of  course  in  an  urbanized  area,  such  as  a traditional
downtown  or  city/village  neighborhood.  But  there  are  many  “gray
areas”  in  the  A/GFTC  region  which  may  also benefit  from  the
provision  of some  pedestrian  accommodation.  These  include:
Isolated  suburban  neighborhoods.
Many communities  have
residential  developments  which  are  not  adjacent  to  pedestrian
generators  such as  commercial  areas or schools.  However,  that
doesn’t  mean  people  stop  walking,  either  for  exercise,  as a social
activity,  or  to  and  from  bus  stops.  Providing  sidewalks  in these
areas  confers  several  benefits.  Some suburban  developments
have  streets  with  pavement  wi dths
exceeding  30′.  Th is can  lead  to
higher  vehicle  speeds,  in

creased stormwater  runoff, and  increased
municipal  maintenance  cost.  In  areas  in which  all  homes  have
double ‐wide driveways,  on ‐street  parking  is  not  utilized  on  a
consistent  basis,  and extra  roadway  width is  not  always  necessary.
Providing  two 11′  lanes  and  sidewalks  with  tree  buf fers
mini mize
s
all  of these  impacts,  in  addition  to  creating  an  attractive  and  safe
place  to walk.
Hamlet  areas.
Much of  the  A/GFTC  planning  area is  rural.  In  these
areas,  there  are  often  small  pockets  of  commercial  or  residential
uses  clustered  together.  Since  these  places  can  act  as  a  focal  point
for  the community,  pedestrian  activity  should  be  accommodated.
AASHTO  recommends  that  these  rural  clusters  or  hamlets  may
receive  the  same  consideration
for  ped
estrian facilities  as  more
urban  areas  (AASHTO,  July  2004).  Even  if  sidewalks  are  not
warranted,  pedestrian crossings  should  be  considered.

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
30
30

Pedestrian Priority Map
One
of  the  biggest  challenges  in  planning  for  pedestrian  facilities  is
to  know  where  they  should  be  located  within  the  community.  In
cases  where  the  infrastructure  already  exists, the  question
becomes  a  matter  of  priority  for  maintenance  and  repair.  Many
agencies  have  issued  criteria  and  thresholds  for  the placement  of
pedestrian  facilities  for  new  develop m
ent. For  example,  NYSDOT
uses  a  Pedestrian  Generator  Checklist  to  determine  if  a  specific
project  warrants  inclusion  of  pedestrian  facilities.  These checklists
are  useful  on  a  project ‐by ‐project  basis,  but do  not  address  larger
pedestrian  needs  outside  of the  project  site.  In  addition,  these
checklists  can  sometimes  provide  a  narrow  picture  of  the
surrounding  environment,  due  to  their  li

mited scope.
Communities  with  limited  resources  struggle to  determine  where
their  pedestrian  improvement  efforts  are  most  needed.  In
addition,  development  patterns  often  drift  across  municipal
boundaries,  creating  situations  where  a  portion  of a  neighborhood
or  commercial  area has  sidewalks  and  the  rest  does  not.  A/ GFTC
has  therefore  creat

ed  a  Pedestrian  Priority  Map.  This  map  is  not
intended  to  indicate  precise  locations  for  pedestrian  facilities,  but
rather  to show  the  general  areas  in which  pedestrian  activity
would  be likely,  if  facilities  existed.  This  takes  into account
proximity  to  community  features  such as  schools,  bus lines,
pharmacies,  groceries, co nvenience
sto r

es, libraries,  and  municipal
centers;  housing  unit  density;  and “community  core”  areas,  such  as
downtowns  and  hamlet  centers,  which  have  a  high  density  of
commercial  uses.
Each  of  these  factors  was  weighted  to account  for relative
importance  in  terms  of  pedestrian  activity.  For example,  proxi m
ity
to  schools  received  more  weight  than  proximity  to  convenience
stores,

since  schools  traditionally  have  higher  rates  of  pedestrian
activity  among  children,  considered  “at ‐risk”  pedestrians.
This  map  can  be  used  to  determine  where  pedestrian  facilities  are
more  likely  to  be  used.  This  can  be  helpful  in  areas  of more  recent
growth  as  well  as along  th e
thr esholds  betwee

n  urban,  suburban,
and  rural  areas.  The  intent  is  not  to  mandate  that sidewalks  be
installed  in  all areas  of high  demand.

 Pedestrian Priority
Pedestrian
Priority
Map
Map

This
map  can  be  used  to  determine
where  pedestrian  facilities  are  more
likely  to  be  used
A  detailed  version of  the  map  can  be
found  online  here:
http://www.agftc.org/
alternativetransportation.htm
Who should use the
Who
should use the
Pedestrian Priority
Pedestrian
Priority
Map?
Map?

Planning
Boards,  when  reviewing
development  proposals  which  may
or  may  not call  for  pedestrian
features
Departments  of  Public  Works , when
planning  capital  improvements
Elected Officials , when  deciding
whether  to appropriate  funds for
pedestrian  improvements  and  when
completing  local  planning  efforts,
such  as  comprehensive  plans,
downtown  plans,  and  transportation
plans
A/GFTC  Policy  and  Technical
Advisory  Committees , when
reviewing  applicable  pedestrian
planning  efforts  and  project
proposals
NYSDOT staff , when  completing  the
pedestrian  generator  checklist

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |

Map 4: Pedestrian Priority Area Analysis
31
31

A
detailed  map  of  the  Pedestrian  Priority  Areas
can  be  found  online  at
http://www.agftc.org/alternativetransportation.htm

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
32
32

IMPLEMENTATION
Partnerships
The
improvements  outlined in  this  plan  are  extensive,  and  will  take
a  significant  and focused  effort  to  accomplish.  In  addition,
implementation  will be  at  the  hands  of  many  different  agencies.
For  on‐road  facilities,  the implementation  lead  is  likely  to  be  the
roadway  owner. For  off‐road  facilities,  a  wider  variety  of  lead
agencies  is  possible,  such  as  local  muni cipaliti

es  or  recreation  and
open  space  groups.  Any  projects  which  involve  acquisition  of
easements  or  rights ‐of‐way  will also  involve  the landowners  as  a
key  stakeholder.
In  terms  of maintenance,  it  can  be  assumed  that  on ‐road  bicycle
and  pedestrian  facilities  will be  the  responsibility  of  whichev er
agency  currently  maintains  the  roadway

itself,  unless  other  specific
provisions  are  made.  For multi ‐use  trails,  there  may  be partnership
opportunities  to  provide  some  or all  maintenance  services.  This
can  take  the forms  of  occasional  volunteer  events,  such as  trail‐
cleaning  days, or a  more  fo rmal
maintenance  agr
eement between
agencies  and  groups  to  perform  maintenance.
In  addition,  local  not ‐for‐ profit  organizations,  such as  the  Feeder
Canal  Alliance,  WCS&QBO,  or  Creating  Healthy Places  to  Live,
Work,  and  Play  may  be able  to assist  in  identifying  and
implementing  some  of the  spot  improvements  listed  in  this  plan.
For  example,  creating   an

d  maintaining  an  inventory  of individual
bicycle  and  pedestrian  hazards  may  be useful.  It may  also  be
possible  to  partner  to  perform  events  such  as  targeted  road
sweepings  or  trail  maintenance,  with  help  from the  local  and
county  DPWs.  Sponsored  community  events  would  also  raise  the
profile  of  th e
organizations  and  provide  an  importa n
t community
education  benefit.

Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
Regional
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan

Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
Adirondack/Glens
Falls Transportation Council |
33
33

Funding Sources
The
following  funding  sources  have  historically  been  available  for projects  which  involve  bicycle  and  pedestrian
facilities.  Not  all  of these  programs  are  currently  active;  conversely,  new programs  may  arise which  could  be  applied
towards  bicycle  and  pedestrian  facilities.  In  seeking  funding  sources,  it  is  important  to  keep  in  mind  the  stipulations  and
requirem ents of  the  funding  agency.  For

instance,  projects  funded  under NYSDOT’s  Transportation  Alternatives
Program  must  follow  the  State’s  design,  bidding,  and  grant  reporting  process,  which  can  be  very  involved.
Program Granting Agency On ‐ / Off ‐
Road

Eligible  Activities Local
Match

Transportation
Alternatives  Program

NYS  Department
of  Transportation
(NYSDOT)

Both Provision  of  Facilities  for  Bicycles  and  Pedestrians  (on‐  or
off ‐road)

Yes
Make  the  Connection A/GFTC Both Small‐ scale projects  that  improve  the  region’s  bicycle  and
pedestrian  travel  network

Yes
Highway  Safety
Improvement  Projects
(HSIP)

FHWA/NYSDOT Both Safety  improvement  projects  on  any  public  road  or
publically  owned  bicycle  or  pedestrian  pathway  or  trail.

Yes
National  Scenic
Byways  Discretionary
Grants

Federal  Highway
Administration
(FHWA)

On‐ Road Construction  along  a  scenic  byway  of  a  facility  for
pedestrians  and  bicyclists;  safety  improvements  for
deficiencies  resulting from  designation  as  a  Byway

Yes
Consolidated  Local
Street  and Highway
Improvement
Program  (CHIPS)

NYSDOT On‐ Road Local  highway  projects  which  can  include  elements  such
as:  Bike  lanes  and wide  curb  lanes;  shared  use  paths,  and
bike  paths  within  the  highway  ROW

No
Recreational  Trails
Program

NYS  Office  of
Parks,  Recreation,
and  Historic
Preservation  (NYS
OPRHP)

Off ‐Road Acquisition,  development,  rehabilitation  and
maintenance  of  multi‐ use trails

Yes
Local  Waterfront
Revitalization  Program

NYS  Department
of  State  (NYSDOS)

Both Implementation  of  projects  listed  in  a  locally  adopted
Waterfront  Revitalization  Plan;  communities  without  this
type  of  plan  are  not  eligible  to  apply

Yes
Adirondack  Smart
Growth  Grants

NYS  Department
of  Environmental
Conservation
(NYSDEC)

Both Focused  on  planning  and  design  projects  including:
Efficient  transportation  systems;  Main  streets,  including
bicycle  and  pedestrian  access; Public access
improvements,  including  trails

No
Creating  Healthy
Places  to  Live,  Work,
and  Play

NYS  Department
of  Health

Both Small  grants  available  to municipalities  to  pursue
Complete  Streets  projects  or  purchase  bicycle racks,  if
community  has  passed  Complete  Streets  policy

No
Cleaner  Greener
Communities

NYSERDA Both Implementation  of  regional  sustainability  projects,
including  bicycle  and  pedestrian  activities

Yes
Surface  Transportation
Program/National
Highway  Performance
Program*  (STP/NHPP)  FHWA/NYSDOT
On‐Road  Provision  of  Facilities  for  Bicycles  and  Pedestrians  (as  part
of  concurrent  construction  of  roadway  or  bridge
Yes

*Note:  STP/NHPP  funding  currently  constrained  by  preservation  funding  targets  set  by  NYSDOT

Bay Street & Sanford Street
Glens Falls, NY INTERSECTION SAFETY STUDYDecember 2013
prepared for:
Prepared by: 3 Winners Circle
Albany, NY 12205CHA File: 25857

Bay St. and Sanford St. Safety Study, Glens Falls, NY i TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.0INTRODUCTION …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 4
2.0EXISTING CONDITIONS …………………………………………………………………………………………………. 4
A. SITE AREA …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 4
B. SITE OBSERVATIONS / POTENTIAL FACTORS ……………………………………………………………….. 8
C. ACCIDENT HISTORY ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 9
D. TRAFFIC VOLUMES ……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 10
E. LEVEL OF SERVICE AND CAPACITY ANALYSIS …………………………………………………………….. 13
3.0IMPROVEMENT INITIATIVES ………………………………………………………………………………………… 14
4.0CONCLUSION …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 16
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Types of Collisions ………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 9
Table 2: Traffic Volumes ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 10
Table 3: HCM Intersection LOS ……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 13
Table 4: LOS Summary – PM peak period ………………………………………………………………………………….. 13
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Bay Street and Sanford Street ……………………………………………………………………………………… 5
Figure 2: AADT Hourly Traffic Volumes …………………………………………………………………………………….. 11
Figure 3: PM Peak Hour Volumes …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 12
Figure 4: Backplate with Retroreflective Border …………………………………………………………………………. 15
LIST OF PHOTOS
Photo 1: On Bay Street looking south at Sanford Street ………………………………………………………………… 6
Photo 2: Pedestal pole on southeast corner………………………………………………………………………………… 6
Photo 3: On Bay Street looking north (Hunter St. on Right) …………………………………………………………… 7
Photo 4: On Hunter Street looking westbound toward Bay St. ……………………………………………………….. 7
Photo 5: On Sanford Street at stop line looking westbound …………………………………………………………… 8
Photo 6: On Hunter St. at stop bar and sign looking north …………………………………………………………….. 8
Photo 7: On Sanford Street looking westbound …………………………………………………………………………… 8
Photo 8: Signal Pole at northeast corner …………………………………………………………………………………… 14
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A-Accident Evaluation
Appendix B – Traffic Volume Data

Bay and Sanford Street, Glens Falls, NY: Safety StudyPage 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CHA conducted a study to evaluate the accident history and identify measures to improve safety at the
Bay Street and Sanford Street intersection, located in Glens Falls, New York. The tasks performed for
this traffic study included the following:
1.Review of accident data for a 5-year period to determine the most frequent types of accidents
and common contributing factors in those accidents.
2.Collection of traffic data by means of field visit including manual turning movement counts,
geometric measurements and signal timing and phasing.
3.Analysis of collected traffic data.
4.Development of measures to improve traffic and safety conditions at this intersection.
Bay Street and Sanford Street intersect at a four-way intersection operating under traffic signal control.
Each approach consists of a shared left/ through/right turn lane with parking permitted on both sides of
all approaches. Bay Street and Sanford Street are essentially straight and level. Pedestrians are
accommodated through a sidewalk on the both sides of Bay Street and Sanford Street with a utility strip
separating the concrete curb from the sidewalk. Pedestrian signals exist to accommodate crossings on
all approaches. There are no separate bicyclist accommodations. Bus stops exist on both the Bay Street
north and south approaches. There is street lighting and overhead utilities that run along the south side
of Sanford Street and the west side of Bay Street. The posted speed limits of Bay Street and Sanford
Street are 30 mph. Approximately 145 ft. south of this intersection, Hunter Street intersects Bay Street
at an unsignalized “T” intersection.
The accident analysis was performed for the Bay Street and Sanford Street intersection using accident
data provided by the City of Glens Falls Police Department. The analysis includes crashes for a five year
period that occurred from April 24, 2008 through April 24, 2013. Detailed accident summary sheet,
collision diagram, and detailed accident history are included in Appendix A.
There were 25 accidents at the Bay Street and Sanford Street intersection over the last five years. Based
on the data, 16 of these accidents occurred within the last three year period. There were 9 (36%)
injury, 13 (52%) property damage only, and 3 (12%) non-reportable or unknown accidents. There were
no fatalities. There were 5 accidents (20%) that occurred at the Bay Street and Hunter Street
intersection. The two predominate types of accidents were angle vehicle crashes and rear-end crashes,
although there was no identifiable pattern associated with the rear-end accidents. See Section 2.0C for
a complete discussion of the accident history.
A capacity analysis was performed for the PM peak period which shows that the intersection is
operating at an overall LOS B with all approaches operating at LOS A or B. See Sections 2.0D and 2.0E
for a complete discussion of the traffic volumes and capacity analysis.
Based upon a site visit and a review of the existing geometrics, operations and accident history, several
observations and potential contributing factors were identified and are discussed in Section 2.0B.
Among the observations are limited visibility of the traffic signals for the Sanford Street approaches and
close spacing and limited visibility for Hunter Street. Although the accident data did not indicate a
safety issue associated with pedestrians, some of the pedestrian signals were not functioning according

Bay and Sanford Street, Glens Falls, NY: Safety StudyPage 2 to the intended operation and the pedestrian signal at the northwest corner of the intersection was
missing at the time of this study due to an accident that occurred in April 2013.
Improvements have been identified for the City of Glens Falls’ consideration to improve safety at this
intersection. Detailed descriptions of the recommended improvements are provided in Section 3.0 of
this report. These improvements include removing vegetation, modifying the pedestrian signals,
modifying the vehicular signals, removing or delineating the parking spaces and providing access
management.
A brief description of these improvements is as follows:
Vegetation
Trees, bushes and overgrown vegetation limit visibility at the northeast corner of the Bay Street and
Hunter Street intersection and along Sanford Street on the north side of the westbound approach. Lines
of sight should be maintained by trimming and removing as necessary, the trees, bushes and overgrown
vegetation.
Pedestrian Signals
While the accident data did not indicate a safety issue, the pedestrian signals at the southwest and
southeast corners are not functioning according to the intended operation. The pushbuttons at the
southwest corner operate the opposite approach than designated by placement and signage (e.g.
button to cross Bay Street south leg operates Sanford Street west leg and the button to cross the
Sanford Street west leg operates the Bay Street south leg) and there is no accommodation to cross the
Bay Street south leg from the southeast corner, since the pedestrian button at the southeast corner
controls the Sanford Street west leg crossing. In addition, the pedestrian signal at the northwest corner
of the intersection is missing due to an accident that occurred in April 2013. The pushbuttons, signs and
pedestrian signals at the southeast and southwest corners should be corrected and the signal at the
northwest corner installed to accommodate pedestrian crossings through the intersection.
Vehicular Signals
Sections 2.0B and 3.0 provide a detailed discussion of the placement, layout and visibility of the
vehicular traffic signals. Given the longitudinal positioning and the mounting height over the pavement,
the visibility of the signals may be a contributing factor in the accidents at this intersection.
Adjust Signal Head PositionThe signals controlling the westbound approach should be lowered at least 2.5 to 3 feet. The signals
controlling the eastbound approach should be lowered at least 1.5 to 2 feet. Determination of the
need for lowering the mast arm, installing new or providing signal brackets to effectively lower the
signals should be assessed. A detailed evaluation of the signals and the structural capacity of the
supports will be necessary prior to implementing this measure. This evaluation could be
approached by having a structural engineer review and evaluate the design shop drawings of the
mast arm poles that were installed and/or work with the pole manufacturer to determine the ability
of the poles to accept loading revisions based on their design load.

Bay and Sanford Street, Glens Falls, NY: Safety StudyPage 3 Install backplates Backplates with retroreflective borders is a low cost safety treatment that can be added to the
existing traffic signal indication. A signal head equipped with a backplate with a retroreflective
border enhances the visibility of the illuminated signal faces, in both daytime and nighttime
conditions, which has the potential to reduce unintentional red-light running crashes. Prior to
implementing this measure, the structural capacity of the supports will need to be evaluated. An
average estimated cost for a backplate with yellow retroreflective border is $120 to $150 per
backplate.
Access Management
Five of the 25 accidents over the 5 year period occurred at the Bay Street and Hunter Street
intersection. Long term, evaluation of permitting only right turns in and right turns out of Hunter Street
and restricting left turn movements could be considered. This evaluation would need to consider the
impact the diverted left turn movements would have to the adjacent intersections.

Bay and Sanford Street, Glens Falls, NY: Safety StudyPage 4 1.0INTRODUCTION
CHA conducted a study to evaluate and recommend measures to improve safety at the Bay Street and
Sanford Street intersection located in Glens Falls, New York. The study was initiated by a request from
the Glens Falls Police Department to the Adirondack/ Glens Falls Transportation Council (AGFTC) to
evaluate safety concerns at this intersection, which has been the location of several accidents over the
last few years. To address the concerns, AGFTC retained CHA to perform an analysis of existing traffic
and safety conditions at this intersection and to develop engineering solutions that will result in
improvements of the safety for all users, while minimizing impacts to the local community. Tasks
performed for this traffic study included the following:
1.Review of accident data for a 5-year period to determine the most frequent types of accidents
and common contributing factors in those accidents.
2.Collection of traffic data by means of site visit including manual turning movement counts,
geometric measurements and signal timing and phasing.
3.Analysis of collected traffic data.
4.Development of alternatives to improve traffic and safety conditions at this intersection.
2.0EXISTING CONDITIONS
A.SITE AREA
Bay Street [CR 7] and Sanford Street are classified as Urban Minor Arterials. Bay Street is a north-south
roadway that intersects at Glen Street (US Route 9) at its southern end and extends northerly beyond
Douglas Street where it becomes Bay Road. It is generally a two-lane roadway that widens at various
intersections to accommodate turn lanes.
Sanford Street is an east-west roadway that intersects with Quaker Road (State Route (SR) 254) at its
easterly end and at Glen Street (US Route 9) at its westerly end. It is generally a two-lane roadway that
widens at select intersections to accommodate turn lanes. Sanford Street provides access to the old
Sanford Street School, now occupied by BOCES, which is located at the corner of Sanford Street and Ash
Avenue, west of the Sanford Street and Bay Street intersection. Sanford Street is a well-traveled
pedestrian route through the City to the Glens Falls High School, Glens Falls Middle School, and Jackson
Heights Elementary Schools.
The Bay Street and Sanford Street intersection is located in a highly urbanized setting. Land use of the
area within the intersection includes commercial establishments consisting of Bay Optical of Glens Falls
on the northwest corner, a strip building on the southwest corner consisting of multiple uses including
Bellaggio Pizza and Bellissima Salon, Global Tech & Media, Inc. on the north east corner and Main Moon
Chinese Restaurant on the southeast corner. Beyond the intersection along Bay Street, both to the
north and south, the land use is commercial and along Sanford Street, to the east and west the land use
is residential. The intersection is shown in the following Google aerial image below.

Bay and Sanford Street, Glens Falls, NY: Safety StudyPage 5 Figure 1: Bay Street and Sanford Street
Bay Street and Sanford Street are essentially straight and level. The two streets are nearly
perpendicular but there is a slight horizontal curve on Sanford Street just west of the intersection.
Bay Street and Sanford Street intersect at a four-way intersection operating under traffic signal control.
Each approach consists of a shared left/ through/right turn lane with parking permitted on both sides of
all approaches. Parking areas on Bay Street are highlighted with a single white edge line but individual
spaces are not designated within these areas. On street parking is also permitted on both sides of
Sanford Street although no parking areas are defined with pavement markings. Pedestrians are
accommodated through a sidewalk on the both sides of Bay Street and Sanford Street with a utility strip
separating the concrete curb from the sidewalk. There are no separate bicyclist accommodations.
Each approach is controlled by a pair of standard 3-section vehicular signal heads vertically mounted on
mast arms. The mast arm poles are located on the northeast and southwest corners of the intersection
and are angled diagonally through the intersection. The existing operation of the signals consists of two
phases (Bay Street north/south and Sanford Street east/west). The north/south phase was observed to
be approximately 35 seconds with the east/west phase observed to be approximately 18 seconds for a
total cycle length of 65 seconds. Each phase included approximately 4 seconds yellow and 2 seconds all
red. The signal is not part of a coordinated system. No Turn on Red signs are mounted on the mast
arms for each of the approaches to the intersection. See Photo 1.Glens Falls Bay OpticalMain MoonChineseGlobal Text &MediaBellaggio Pizza andBellissima Salon

Bay and Sanford Street, Glens Falls, NY: Safety StudyPage 6 Photo 1: On Bay Street looking south at Sanford Street
The height of the signals, from the top of pavement to the bottom of the signal head housing was
measured in the field. The signals that control the northbound and westbound approaches were at 20.5
ft. and 20.9 ft. The signals that control the southbound and eastbound approaches were approximately
19.5 ft. and 20 ft.
Pedestrian signals exist on each of the corners, consisting of one-section pedestrian signal heads with
the upraised hand and walking person symbol overlaid
upon each other. No countdown timers exist at this
intersection. The pedestrian signal heads, buttons and
signs are mounted on the mast arm at the northeast and
southwest corners. At the southeast corner, the pedestrian
signals, pushbuttons and signs for crossing the south leg of
Bay Street and the east leg of Sanford Street are both
mounted on the same pedestal pole. At the time of this
study, the pedestrian signal at the northwest corner, which
would have consisted of the pedestrian signals,
pushbuttons and signs for crossing the north leg of Bay
Street and the west leg of Sanford Street, both mounted on
the same pedestal pole, was missing due to a recent accident that occurred which demolished the Bay
Optical sign and the pedestrian signals.Photo 2: Pedestal pole on southeast corner

Bay and Sanford Street, Glens Falls, NY: Safety StudyPage 7 In addition, some of the existing pedestrian push buttons were not operating the intended approach as
noted below:
Southwest corner pedestrian signal·Pushbutton to cross the Bay Street south leg operates the Sanford Street west leg crossing.
·Pushbutton to cross the Sanford Street west leg operates the Bay Street south leg crossing.
Southeast corner pedestrian signal·Pushbutton to cross the Bay Street south leg operates the Sanford Street west leg crossing.
Hence, there is no accommodation for pedestrians to cross the Bay Street south leg from the
southeast corner of the intersection.
Double yellow centerline and white lane line pavement markings along with the stop bars and crosswalk
markings exist on Bay Street. A double yellow centerline pavement marking exists for a minimal
distance along Sanford Street on both the east and west legs of the intersection with no other pavement
markings beyond that, aside from the stop bar and crosswalk lines.
A bus stop exists on both the Bay Street north and south approaches. There is street lighting and
overhead utilities that run along the south side of Sanford Street and the west side of Bay Street. The
posted speed limits of Bay Street and Sanford Street are 30 mph.
Hunter Street intersects Bay Street approximately 145 feet south of the Bay Street and Sanford Street
intersection. See Photo 3. Hunter Street is a two-lane east-west roadway that is Stop controlled and
intersects Bay Street forming an unsignalized “T” intersection. See Photo 4. The Hunter Street
westbound approach consists of a shared left/ right turn lane. Pedestrians are accommodated through
a sidewalk on both sides of Hunter Street with a grassed utility strip separating the concrete curb from
the sidewalk. There are no separate bicyclist accommodations. There are no pavement markings on
Hunter Street. Overgrown brush and vegetation on the northeast corner of the intersection limit the
intersection sight distance.
Photo 3: On Bay Street looking north (Hunter St. on Right) Photo 4: On Hunter Street looking westbound toward Bay St.

Bay and Sanford Street, Glens Falls, NY: Safety StudyPage 8 B.SITE OBSERVATIONS / POTENTIAL FACTORS
The following is a summary of some observations from the field visits:
·Pedestrian pushbuttons are not operating as intended. The pedestrian signal at the northwest
corner is missing, the pushbuttons at the southwest corner operate the opposite approach than
designated by placement and signage (e.g. button to cross Bay Street south leg operates Sanford
Street west leg), and there is no accommodation to cross the Bay Street south leg from the
southeast corner, since the pedestrian button at the southeast corner controls the Sanford
Street west leg crossing. See Section 2.0A.
·Visibility of the signals and signage for
vehicles at the Sanford Street eastbound and
westbound approach stop lines is limited due
to the height and longitudinal placement of
the signals.

·Visibility of the signal and overhead signage is
impeded for Sanford Street westbound
vehicles due to the tree canopy overhanging
the Sanford Street westbound approach. See
Photo 7.
·Visibility of southbound vehicles, pedestrians
and bicyclists on Bay Street is impeded for the
Hunter Street vehicles due to the northbound
queue at Sanford Street, on-street parking
and overgrown bushes at the northwest corner of the Hunter Street and Bay Street intersection.
See Photos 2 and 6.
·Vehicles use the parking lanes on the Bay Street north and south approaches to overtake the
leading vehicles waiting to turn left at the intersection.
·The unmarked eastbound and westbound approach lanes are wide enough to allow vehicles to
overtake other vehicles stopped and turning left on these approaches. As a result, drivers may
overtake the leading vehicles waiting to travel through or turn left at the intersection. See
Photo 1 above.Photo 6: On Hunter St. at stop bar and sign looking north Photo5: On Sanford Streetat stop line looking westboundPhoto7: On Sanford Street looking westbound

Bay and Sanford Street, Glens Falls, NY: Safety StudyPage 9 ·Bicyclists ride both on the sidewalk and on the roadway.
·Parking within the immediate vicinity of the intersection was not observed during the field visits.
However, on-street parking provided close to the intersection would impede sight distance. The
parallel parking maneuvers increases potential for collisions between vehicles parking and those
following who might need to suddenly stop as well as for those parked vehicles entering traffic
which may force vehicles to stop abruptly.
·The close spacing of Hunter Street to the Bay Street and Sanford Street intersection and the
volumes southbound on Bay Street has the potential to increase accidents due to the turning
maneuvers into and out of this Hunter Street intersection.
C.ACCIDENT HISTORY
An accident analysis was performed for the Bay Street and Sanford Street intersection using accident
data provided by the City of Glens Falls Police Department. The analysis includes crashes for a five year
period that occurred from April 24, 2008 through April 24, 2013. Table 1 summarizes the accident
history at the study area intersection. In addition, a detailed accident summary sheet and a collision
diagram are included in Appendix A.
There were 25 accidents at the Bay Street and Sanford Street intersection over the last five years. Based
on the data, 16 of these accidents occurred within the last three year period. There were 9 (36%)
injury, 13 (52%) property damage only, and 3 (12%) non-reportable or unknown accidents. There were
no fatalities.
Table 1: Types of CollisionsType of CollisionNumberPercentageRear-End832%Right Angle936%Left Turn28%Sideswipe312%Overtaking14%Pedestrian/Bicyclist28%Total25100%The data also shows the following:
·Eighty percent (80%) of the accidents occurred in daylight which suggests that night-time
visibility is not the primary contributing factor of the crash history.
·Seventeen accidents (68%) occurred with dry pavement conditions, with the remaining 8
accidents (32%) occurring with wet (5), snow/ice (2), slush (1) conditions.
·Five accidents (20%) occurred at the Hunter Street intersection.
·There was no distinct pattern of the rear-end accidents as 5 occurred at the Bay and Sanford
Street intersection (2 on each of the northbound and southbound approaches and 1 on the
westbound approach) and 3 occurred at the Bay Street and Hunter Street intersection (2 on the
Bay Street southbound and 1 on the northbound approaches).
·The two bicyclist accidents involved a westbound vehicle from Sanford Street and Hunter Street
and a southbound bicyclist traveling against traffic.
·One of the right angle accidents involved alcohol.

Bay and Sanford Street, Glens Falls, NY: Safety StudyPage 10 ·The predominate type of angle accidents involved eastbound vehicles with either the north- or
southbound Bay Street vehicles.
The intersection accident rate was calculated and compared to the statewide average for intersections
on state roads with similar geometry and traffic control. The accident rate for the subject intersection
(not including the 5 Hunter Street accidents) is approximately 0.80 accidents per million entering
vehicles (acc/MEV) as compared to the statewide average of 0.34 acc/MEV. It is noted that the
statewide average is calculated for state roadways only and that since the Bay Street and Sanford Street
are county and local roads, respectively, the characteristics may be slightly different. In addition,
accident rates are typically reported for a 3-year rather than a 5-year period.

D.TRAFFIC VOLUMES
The New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) Traffic Volume Data Viewer was used to
obtain the Average Annual Daily Traffic Volume (AADT) data for Bay Street and Sanford Street. Table 2
below summarizes the 2010 AADT. Figure 2 below shows hourly volumes approaching the intersection.
See Appendix B for the Traffic Hourly Data Report.
Table 2: Traffic VolumesStreetFrom – ToAADTAM PeakHourPM PeakHourNB/ EB1SB/ WB1TotalBay StreetWashington St. to Sanford St5022537510397683897Bay StreetSanford St. to City Line4845546110306615857Sanford Street Bay Street to Ridge Street1816186536812583371
northbound (NB) and southbound (SB) directions for Bay Street and eastbound (EB) and westbound (WB) directions for Sanford Street.
The Traffic Volume Report provided vehicle classification and speed data for Bay Street for the roadway
segment of Sanford Street to the City Line. NYSDOT used an automatic traffic recorder (ATR) device,
placed just north of Hope Avenue to collect the data. Vehicle classification data showed that
approximately 4% of the daily traffic on this segment of Bay Street was heavy vehicles, comprised as 3%
traveling north and 5% traveling south. The speed data showed that the 85th
percentile speed was 35.9
mph in the north direction and 36.8 mph in the south direction with a 50th
percentile speed of
approximately 31.5 mph for each of the directions.
Three signalized intersections exist on Bay Street between Washington Street and Sanford Street (at
Washington Street, Grand Street, Sanford Street). No signalized intersections exist on Bay Street north
of Sanford Street to the City line. North of the City line, there is one midblock crossing, to accommodate
the Warren County Bikeway, and a signalized intersection at NYS Route 254. The data indicates that
motorists travel at a slightly higher 85th
percentile speed in the southbound direction than the
northbound direction. This suggests that the motorists are traveling at a slightly higher speed in the
roadway segment where there is uninterrupted flow and a slightly lower speed in the roadway segment
where there is interrupted flow due to the signals. Bay Street is posted 30 mph so the results of the
speed study are consistent with expected 50th
and 85th
percentile speeds for this posted speed limit and
the character of this area of Bay Street.

Bay and Sanford Street, Glens Falls, NY: Safety StudyPage 11 Figure 2: AADT Hourly Traffic Volumes
Intersection turning movement traffic counts were conducted at the Bay Street and Sanford Street and
Hunter Street intersections on July 30, 2013 during the weekday PM peak period from 4:00 pm to 6:00
pm. Traffic counts were recorded at 15-minute increments. Pedestrian counts were also recorded at
the intersections concurrently with the vehicle counts. The PM peak hour occurred from 4:30 pm to
5:30 pm. See Figure 3 below for the PM peak period volumes. The traffic volumes are included in
Appendix B.
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500HourlyTrafficVolume
Time of Day Average Weekday Traffic Volume: 2010
Bay Street and Sanford Street IntersectionBay Street
NorthboundBay Street
SouthboundSanford Street
Westbound

Bay and Sanford Street, Glens Falls, NY: Safety StudyPage 12 The volumes show the following:
·The two-way PM peak period volume on Bay Street is approximately 820 vehicles, which is more
than twice the two-way PM peak period volume on Sanford Street (375 vehicles).
·Approximately 60% of the traffic entering Hunter Street is from the north (turning left).
·Approximately 85% of the traffic exiting Hunter Street is to the north (turning right).
·The primary pedestrian movement during the PM peak period was from the south (17
pedestrians).

415
402
39
353
27
Sanford Street
211
29
28
178
103
131
164
32
19
158
45
345
28
404
418
382
22
Hunter
Street
32
38
6
35
386
13
388
399
BayStreetFigure 3: PM Peak Hour Volumes

Bay and Sanford Street, Glens Falls, NY: Safety StudyPage 13 E.LEVEL OF SERVICE AND CAPACITY ANALYSIS
Intersection capacity analyses were conducted for the intersection using methodology outlined in the
Highway Capacity Manual 2000 (HCM 2000) published by the Transportation Research Board. Level of
service (LOS) criteria are measured in average delay per vehicle (seconds), and range from LOS A to LOS
F. LOS range from A to F with LOS A considered excellent with very little vehicle delay while level of
service F generally represents conditions with long vehicle delays. Table 3 identifies the levels of service
and associated delay ranges for each type of traffic control.
Capacity analyses were performed for the 2013 Existing PM peak period conditions. Summaries of these
analyses are shown in Table 4. See Appendix B for the LOS analyses. The analyses show that the
intersection operates at overall LOS B with each approach operating at LOS A or B. No geometric
improvements are necessary to accommodate the operations at this intersection.
Table 3: HCM Intersection LOSLOSSignalizedControl Delay per Vehicle (second)A≤ 10B> 10-20C> 20-35D> 35-55E> 55-80F> 80Table 4: LOS Summary – PM peak periodIntersection & ApproachLaneGroup2013 ExistingLOSDelayBay Street and Sanford StreetEastbound
Westbound
Northbound
SouthboundLTR
LTR
LTR
LTRB
B
A
A19.4
19.7
9.6
9.6OverallB12.8

Bay and Sanford Street, Glens Falls, NY: Safety StudyPage 14 3.0IMPROVEMENT INITIATIVES
Based on a review of the existing traffic conditions and accident analysis, several improvements have
been identified as discussed below.
Vegetation
While most of the intersection and surrounding area is open (Photo 1), there are a few locations where
trees and vegetation have become overgrown impairing visibility. At the northeast corner of the Bay
Street and Hunter Street intersection, there is a bush and some overgrown vegetation that limits
visibility (Photo 6) to pedestrians and bicyclists riding on the sidewalk.
Likewise, the trees along the north side of the Sanford Street westbound approach have canopies that
are overhanging the roadway and impacting the view of the traffic signal. The overhead No Right Turn
on Red sign is not visible due to the canopy from these trees (Photo 7). Trees and brush should be
trimmed and removed as necessary to maintain adequate lines of sight.
Pedestrian Signals
While the accident data did not indicate a pedestrian/bicycle safety issue, the pedestrian signals are not
functioning according to the intended operation. In addition, the pedestrian signal at the northwest
corner of the intersection is missing due to an accident that occurred in April 2013. As discussed in
Section 2.0B, the pedestrian signals at the southwest and the southeast are not functioning correctly.
The pushbuttons, signs and pedestrian signals at the northeast corner (Photo 8) are functioning
correctly.
Photo 8: Signal Pole at northeast corner
The pushbuttons, signs and pedestrian signals at the southeast and southwest corners should be
corrected so that the buttons activate the correct signals, and the damaged/missing signals at the
northwest corner should be re-installed to accommodate pedestrian crossings through the intersection.
Vehicular Traffic Signals
The traffic signals that control the Sanford Street eastbound and westbound approaches exceed the
maximum standard for mounting heights of signal faces, as noted in Section 4D.15 of the MUTCD and
NYS Supplement. In accordance with these documents, vehicular signal faces located over any portion

Bay and Sanford Street, Glens Falls, NY: Safety StudyPage 15 of a highway that can be used by motor vehicles shall be at least 15 feet above the pavement and not
more than 19 feet. All of the existing vehicular signal faces exceed this maximum mounting height with
the signals ranging in height from 19.5 feet to 20.9 feet (from top of pavement to bottom of signal
housing). Since all of the signals exceed the maximum height to the bottom of the signal housing,
several of the signals also exceed the maximum top of signal head mounting height.
Visibility of the signals, given the longitudinal positioning and the mounting height over the pavement,
may be a contributing factor in the accidents at this intersection.
Adjust Signal Head PositionsThe signals controlling the westbound approach should be lowered at least 2.5 to 3 feet. The signals
controlling the eastbound approach should be lowered at least 1.5 to 2 feet. Determination of the
appropriate method to lower the signal heads, including the use of new signal brackets, lowering the
mast arm, or installing new signals should be assessed. A detailed engineering evaluation, including
an assessment of the structural capacity of the supports, impact on utilities, and visibility of the
signal heads will be necessary prior to implementing this measure. This evaluation could be
approached by having a structural engineer review and evaluate the design shop drawings of the
mast arm poles that were installed and/or work with the pole manufacturer to determine the ability
of the poles to accept loading revisions based on their design load.
Install backplates Backplates with retroreflective borders is a low cost safety treatmentthat
can be added to the existing traffic signal indication. A signal head equipped
with a backplate with a retroreflective border enhances the visibility of the
illuminated face of the signals, in both daytime and nighttime conditions,
which has the potential to reduce unintentional red-light running crashes.
Prior to implementing this measure, the structural capacity of the supports
will need to be evaluated.
Access Management
Five of the 25 accidents over the 5 year period occurred at the Bay Street and Hunter Street
intersection. Long term, evaluation of permitting only right turns in and right turns out of Hunter Street
and restricting left turn movements could be considered. This evaluation would need to consider the
impact the diverted left turn movements would have to the adjacent intersections.Figure4: Backplate withRetroreflective Border

Bay and Sanford Street, Glens Falls, NY: Safety StudyPage 16 4.0CONCLUSION
This report summarizes the results of an accident analysis for the Bay Street and Sanford Street
intersection and identifies several improvements that can be implemented to improve safety and bring
existing vehicular and pedestrian signal in compliance with the MUTCD and NYS Supplement.
Tasks performed for this traffic study included the following:
1.Review of accident data for a 5-year period to determine the most frequent types of accidents
and common contributing factors in those accidents.
2.Collection of traffic data by means of site visit including manual turning movement counts,
geometric measurements and signal timing and phasing.
3.Analysis of collected traffic data.
4.Development of alternatives to improve traffic and safety conditions at this intersection.
An accident analysis was performed for the Bay Street and Sanford Street intersection using accident
data provided by the City of Glens Falls Police Department. The analysis includes crashes over a five
year period that occurred from April 24, 2008 through April 24, 2013. Detailed accident summary sheets
and a collision diagram are included in Appendix A. A summary of the data showed that there were 20
accidents at the Bay Street and Sanford Street intersection and 5 accidents at the Bay Street and Hunter
Street intersection over the last five years. Based on the data, 16 of these accidents occurred within the
last three year period. There were 9 (36%) injury, 13 (52%) property damage only, and 3 (12%) non-
reportable or unknown accidents. There were no fatalities.
Based on the accident analysis, the intersection crash rate is more than two times higher than the
statewide average for similar intersections. The analysis shows that the two primary accident patterns
at the intersection were rear end accidents and angle accidents between the eastbound approach and
either the north- or southbound approaches. Although 32% of the accidents were rear- end accidents,
there was no pattern associated with these types of accidents.
While the accident data did not indicate a pedestrian/bicycle safety issue, the pedestrian signals at the
southwest and southeast corners are not functioning according to the intended operation and the
pedestrian signal at the northwest corner of the intersection is missing due to an accident that occurred
in April 2013. The pushbuttons, signs and pedestrian signals at the southeast and southwest corners
should be corrected and the signal at the northwest corner installed to accommodate pedestrian
crossings through the intersection.
Average Annual Daily Traffic Volume (AADT) data were obtained from the New York State Department
of Transportation (NYSDOT) Traffic Volume Data Viewer and turning movement counts were performed
for the PM peak period (4 pm to 6 pm) on July 30, 2013. Based upon the existing traffic volumes and
capacity analysis, there is sufficient capacity and acceptable operations at this intersection such that no
geometric improvements are necessary. The capacity analyses performed for the 2013 Existing PM peak
period conditions show that the intersection operates at overall LOS B with each approach operating at
LOS A or B. The traffic volume data is included in Appendix B.

Bay and Sanford Street, Glens Falls, NY: Safety StudyPage 17 Several measures have been identified for the City of Glens Falls’ consideration to improve safety at this
intersection including:
·Removing vegetation along the east side of Bay Street between Hunter Street and Sanford
Street and trim the trees along the north side of the Sanford Street eastbound approach
between Stoddard Avenue and Bay Street.
·Modifying the pedestrian signals at the southwest and southeast corners and install the
pedestrian signal at the northwest corner.
·Lower the signal heads to comply with MUTCD standards.
·Install signal backplates (subject to confirmation of design loads).
·Providing access management.

APPENDIX A
ACCIDENT DATA

No. of
Accidents
% of AccidentNo. ofAccidents% of AccidentNo. ofAccidents% of Accident
00%832%526%
936%28%421%
1352%936%00%
14%312%15%
28%00%421%
25100%14%316%
28%211%
00%00%
00%00%
00%
19100%
25100%No. ofAccidents% of AccidentNo. ofAccidents% of AccidentNo. ofAccidents% of Accident
312%00%832%
312%312%520%
728%728%624%
312%936%624%
728%624%
28%00%
25100%25100%25100%
No. of
Accidents% of AccidentNo. of
Accidents% of AccidentNo. of
Accidents% of Accident
1456%1768%2080%
728%520%00%
312%00%14%
14%28%416%
00%14%00%
00%00%00%
00%00%
25100%25100%25100%No. ofAccidents% of AccidentNo. ofAccidents% of AccidentNo. ofAccidents% of Accident
25100%728%521%
00%416%1354%
00%624%625%
00%28%24100%
00%312%
00%28%
14%
25100%25100%Wednesday>55
ThursdayTotal Straight and Level
Straight and Grade
Staright at Hillcrest
Curve and Level
Curve and Grade
Curve at Hillcrest
TotalMonday16-25
Tuesday26-55
Sunday
Total TotalTotalTotal
Day of WeekAge of Driver
Friday
Saturday Roadway CharacteristicsFog/Smog/SmokeFloodedUnknown
UnknownOther/Unknown SnowSnow/IceDark Road – Lighted
Sleet/Hail/Freezing RainSlushDark Road – Unlighted CloudyWetDawn
RainMuddyDusk WeatherPavementLight Conditions
ClearDryDaylight 2012
Unknown
TotalTotalTotal 20114 PM – 7 PMFall (Sept.- Nov.)
7 PM – 12 AM
2013 20096 AM – 10 AMSpring (Mar. – May)
201010 AM- 4 PMSummer (June – Aug.) YearTime of DayTime of Year
200812 AM – 6 AMWinter (Dec. – Feb.) TotalOvertaking
Other
TotalTotal Pedestrian/Bicyclist Non-ReportableSideswipeWest
UnknownHead-on
Unknown AnimalNorth & West
North & East Property Damage OnlyRight AngleEast25857Accident Summary SheetSeverityTypeDirection
FatalRear-EndNorth April 24, 2008 to April 24, 2013Sanford StreetSUMMARY OF ACCIDENT HISTORYApril 24, 2008 – April 24, 2013PIN
CHA Project No. 25857Route No. or Street Name:
Bay Street
South & West
Fixed ObjectSouth & East City
Glens Falls
DateCHA Project No. Project Name:
AGFTC Safety Study
County
WarranAt Intersection with / or Between
InjuryLeft TurnSouth

TE 213 (Equivalent)
Diagram No.:
County: WarrenPIN:Route No. or Street Name:Case No:
Town:Bay StreetFile:
City:Glens FallsAt Intersection with/ or Between:By:AGFTC
Village of:Sanford StreetDate:6/4/2013
Time Period
From:04/24/08
To:04/24/13SeverityApparent
No. of Months:60(NR, PDO,Contributing
ID No.DateTimeINJ, FAT)FactorsTypeDirectionDescriptionLocation
104/24/1311:492PDO11119REN, NBay / Hunter
24/8/1316:122INJ11112RAN,WBay / Sanford
312/8/129:262PDO11227LTSW, SEBay / Hunter
411/16/1212:362UNK111118, 7OTNE, NEMV 1 entered path of MV 2 and was struck by MV 2.Bay / Sanford
511/09/1210:292PDO11117,4LTW, NMV 1 struck MV 2 as MV 2 was turning left in front of MV 1Bay / Sanford
607/17/1215:132UNK111113, 13SSN, NMV 1 struck MV 2 in the parking laneBay / Sanford
707/16/1217:452INJ11117, 42RAS, WMV 1 failed to yield ROW to MV 2Bay / Hunter
804/17/1220:102INJ41124,9REW,WMV 1 struck MV 2Bay / Sanford
903/16/1213:252INJ11232,17RANW, SWDriver of MV 1 intoxicated, ran red light, struck MV 2, MV 2 struck building.Bay / Sanford
1011/09/1119:182PDO411117RAE, NMV 1 failed to yield ROW to MV 2; MV 1 struck MV 2Bay / Sanford
1110/29/1117:322PDO311217, 4RAN, WMV 1 disregarded traffic device and collided with MV 2Bay / Sanford
1201/24/118:512PDO115117RAE,NMV 1 skidded through red light and struck MV 2Bay / Sanford
1311/04/1015:362PDO11239RES, SMV 1 struck MV 2 from behind as MV 2 was attempting LTBay / Sanford
1408/24/1015:192INJ11119RES, SMV 1 struck MV 2Bay / Hunter
1507/19/1014:523PDO11129RES,S,SMV 1 struck MV 2, forcing MV 2 to strike MV 3 while MV 3 waiting to make LTBay / Hunter
1604/12/1014:512PDO11119REN, NMV 1 struck MV 2 from behindBay / Sanford
1702/24/1011:102INJ11444, 66REN,NMV 1 struck MV 2 from behindBay / Sanford
1802/03/1014:373PDO11214RES, SMV 1struck MV 2 from behind, forcing MV 2 to strike MV 3Bay / Sanford
1901/17/1013:522INJ111217, 4RANE, SMV 2 failed to obey red light and struck MV 1Bay / Sanford
2012/23/0912:402NR111213SSS,SWMV 1 was struck by MV 2 while MV 1 attempted to pass MV 2 on rightBay / Sanford
2108/25/098:422PDO111114RASE, NMV 1 was truck by MV 2 (bicyclist)Bay / Sanford
2202/09/0915:442INJ112117RAE, SMV 1 struck MV 2Bay / Sanford
2312/24/0822:162PDO414317, 66RAN, WMV 1 ran red light, struck MV 2Bay / Sanford
2410/20/0820:412PDO411213SSS, SMV 1 was struck by MV 2 while MV 1 attempted to pass MV 2 on rightBay / Sanford
2508/21/0816:522INJ111217RAS, WMV 1 ran red light, struck MV 2Bay / Sanford
26
27
28
29
30
31
unk – unknownContributing Factors Legendnr = non reportable2=alcohol
4 = Driver Inattention19 = Unsafe Speed
Accident Type Legend7 = Failure to Yield Right-of Way20 = Unsafe Lane Changing
RA – Right Angle9 = Follwing Too Closely42 = Brakes defective
RE – Rear End13= passing or lane usage improper66 = Pavement Slippery
LT – Left Turn17 = Traffic Control Disregarded
OT – Overtaking18 = Turning Improperly
SS – SideswipeDETAILS OF ACCIDENT HISTORY FOR LOCATION
MV 1 struck MV 2
MV 1 entered path of MV 2 and was struck by MV 2. MV1 struck MV2LightConditions
Roadway
Character
Roadway
Surface
Condition
Weather
No.ofVeh.V:ProjectsANYK325857DataOtherTrafficTE 213 Accident Summary_bay_sanfordPage 1 of 1

APPENDIX B
TRAFFIC DATA

SHORT REPORT
General Information
Site Information
Analyst
Agency or Co.
CHA
Date Performed
8/6/2013
Time PeriodPM peak period IntersectionBay St. / Sanford St. Area TypeAll other areas JurisdictionCity of Glens Falls Analysis Year2013 Volume and Timing InputEBWBNBSBLTTHRTLTTHRTLTTHRTLTTHRT Number of Lanes010010010010 Lane GroupLTRLTRLTRLTR Volume (vph)2910332191312845345282735339 % Heavy Vehicles010000000010 PHF0.830.830.830.820.820.820.960.960.960.930.930.93 Pretimed/Actuated (P/A)AAAAAAAAAAAA Startup Lost Time2.02.02.02.0 Extension of Effective Green2.02.02.02.0 Arrival Type3333 Unit Extension3.03.03.03.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume2003001700700 Lane Width16.014.012.012.0 Parking/Grade/ParkingN0NN0NN0NN0N Parking/Hour Bus Stops/Hour0000 Minimum Pedestrian Time3.23.23.33.2 PhasingEW Perm020304NS Perm060708 Timing G =18.0 G = G = G = G =35.0 G =0.0 G =0.0 G =0.0 Y =6 Y = Y = Y = Y =6 Y =0 Y =0 Y =0 Duration of Analysis (hrs) =0.25 Cycle Length C =65.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS DeterminationEBWBNBSB Adjusted Flow Rate198217435451 Lane Group Capacity525522932960 v/c Ratio0.380.420.470.47 Green Ratio0.280.280.540.54 Uniform Delay d
119.019.29.29.3 Delay Factor k0.110.110.110.11 Incremental Delay d
20.50.50.40.4 PF Factor1.0001.0001.0001.000 Control Delay19.419.79.69.6 Lane Group LOSBBAA Approach Delay19.419.79.69.6 Approach LOSBBAA Intersection Delay12.8Intersection LOSBCopyright©2007 University of Florida, All Rights ReservedHCS+TM
Version 5.3Generated: 8/6/2013 8:26 AMPage1 of1Short Report8/6/2013file://C:Usersô4AppDataLocalTemps2k329F.tmp

STATION:
174936 New York State Department of Transportation
Traffic Count Hourly Report
Page 1 of 2
ROAD #:
0100ROAD NAME:
BAY ST FROM:
SANFORD ST TO:
CITY LINE COUNTY:
Warren
DIRECTION: Northbound FACTOR GROUP: 30 REC. SERIAL #: 2573 FUNC. CLASS: 16 CITY:
GLENS FALLS
STATE DIR CODE: 1 WK OF YR: 40 PLACEMENT: 105FT N OF HOPE AVE NHS: no LION#:
DATE OF COUNT: 10/01/2010 @ REF MARKER: JURIS: City BIN:
NOTES LANE 1: WEEK 40 NB ADDL DATA: Class Speed CC Stn: RR CROSSING:
COUNT TYPE: VEHICLES BATCH ID: DOT-R1ww40b HPMS SAMPLE:
COUNT TAKEN BY: ORG CODE: TST INITIALS: BJF PROCESSED BY: ORG CODE: DOT INITIALS: mab
12
TO
11
TO
22
TO
33
TO
44
TO
55
TO
66
TO
77
TO
88
TO
99
TO
1010
TO
1111
TO
1212
TO
11
TO
22
TO
33
TO
44
TO
55
TO
66
TO
77
TO
88
TO
99
TO
1010
TO
1111
TO
12DAILY DAILY
DAILY HIGH HIGH
AMPM
DATE
DAY
TOTAL
COUNT
HOUR
1F
2S
3S
4M
5T
6W
7T
8F
9S
10 S
11 M
12 T
13 W
14 T
15 F
16 S
17 S
18 M
19 T
20 W
21 T
22 F
23 S
24 S
25 M
26 T
27 W
28 T
29 F
30 S
31 S379 388 471 381 444 494 439 328 292 203 126 115 116 56
31 28 16 26 22 22 42 101 178 256 291 319 316 244 255 235 232 237 190 164 106 115 69 503545 319 11
28 21 17 25 20 23 38 57 137 160 218 276 260 229 212 227 217 192 159 148 101 54 44 322895 276 11
12 18 7 15 53 69 100 279 391 353 340 401 478 449 366 430 424 379 223 173 116 89 66 375268 478 12
21 9 11 25 53 69 113 299 369 388 350 346 396 405 363 435 420 385 257 182 132 102 58 405228 435 15
23 9 8 13 52 69 102 293 366 319 300 317 427 414 381 410 396 341 254 191 146 84 58 345007 427 12
26 12 16 24 50 67 105 273 344 388 358 397
AVERAGE WEEKDAY HOURS (Axle Factored, Mon 6AM to Fri Noon) ADT
23 10 12 21 52 68 105 286 368 362 345 370 434 423 370 425 413 368 245 182 131 92 61 37 5203
DAYS
Counted
7HOURS
Counted
146WEEKDAYS
Counted
4WEEKDAY
Hours
80AVERAGE WEEKDAY
High Hour
434% of day
8%Axle Adj.
Factor
1.000Seasonal/Weekday
Adjustment Factor
1.074ESTIMATED (one way)
AADT
4845
ROAD #:
0100ROAD NAME:
BAY ST FROM:
SANFORD ST TO:
CITY LINE COUNTY:
Warren
STATION:
174936STATE DIR CODE:
1PLACEMENT:
105FT N OF HOPE AVE DATE OF COUNT: 10/01/2010

STATION:
174936 New York State Department of Transportation
Traffic Count Hourly Report
Page 2 of 2
ROAD #:
0100ROAD NAME:
BAY ST FROM:
SANFORD ST TO:
CITY LINE COUNTY:
Warren
DIRECTION: Southbound FACTOR GROUP: 30 REC. SERIAL #: 2573 FUNC. CLASS: 16 CITY:
GLENS FALLS
STATE DIR CODE: 2 WK OF YR: 40 PLACEMENT: 105FT N OF HOPE AVE NHS: no LION#:
DATE OF COUNT: 10/01/2010 @ REF MARKER: JURIS: City BIN:
NOTES LANE 1: WEEK 40 SB ADDL DATA: Class Speed CC Stn: RR CROSSING:
COUNT TYPE: VEHICLES BATCH ID: DOT-R1ww40b HPMS SAMPLE:
COUNT TAKEN BY: ORG CODE: TST INITIALS: BJF PROCESSED BY: ORG CODE: DOT INITIALS: mab
12
TO
11
TO
22
TO
33
TO
44
TO
55
TO
66
TO
77
TO
88
TO
99
TO
1010
TO
1111
TO
1212
TO
11
TO
22
TO
33
TO
44
TO
55
TO
66
TO
77
TO
88
TO
99
TO
1010
TO
1111
TO
12DAILY DAILY
DAILY HIGH HIGH
AMPM
DATE
DAY
TOTAL
COUNT
HOUR
1F
2S
3S
4M
5T
6W
7T
8F
9S
10 S
11 M
12 T
13 W
14 T
15 F
16 S
17 S
18 M
19 T
20 W
21 T
22 F
23 S
24 S
25 M
26 T
27 W
28 T
29 F
30 S
31 S417 473 472 479 572 520 530 478 418 276 199 179 127 75
52 33 18 17 10 20 40 86 145 241 270 276 324 331 282 329 299 286 287 180 177 135 136 654039 331 13
39 35 18 22 14 19 28 64 98 135 192 248 285 290 246 280 282 285 250 196 150 90 40 393345 290 13
13 17 9 16 15 45 96 236 305 340 401 396 487 511 545 493 490 439 325 260 170 163 103 495924 545 14
32 19 10 15 15 54 118 254 308 316 317 412 451 417 492 486 544 480 352 241 194 155 97 515830 544 16
28 17 8 10 13 55 108 229 278 301 351 398 530 503 484 448 487 435 346 229 201 146 129 545788 530 12
24 26 8 14 22 43 105 240 299 291 330 378
AVERAGE WEEKDAY HOURS (Axle Factored, Mon 6AM to Fri Noon) ADT
28 21 9 13 17 51 107 240 298 312 363 411 489 477 507 476 507 451 341 243 188 155 110 51 5865
DAYS
Counted
7HOURS
Counted
146WEEKDAYS
Counted
4WEEKDAY
Hours
80AVERAGE WEEKDAY
High Hour
507% of day
9%Axle Adj.
Factor
1.000Seasonal/Weekday
Adjustment Factor
1.074ESTIMATED (one way)
AADT
5461
ROAD #:
0100ROAD NAME:
BAY ST FROM:
SANFORD ST TO:
CITY LINE COUNTY:
Warren
STATION:
174936STATE DIR CODE:
2PLACEMENT:
105FT N OF HOPE AVE DATE OF COUNT: 10/01/2010

New York State Department of Transportation
Classification Count Average Weekday Data Report
ROAD #: 0100 ROAD NAME: BAY ST YEAR: 2010 STATION:174936COUNTY NAME: Warren MONTH: October
REGION CODE: 1
FROM: SANFORD ST
TO: CITY LINE
REF-MARKER:
END MILEPOINT: 0110103 NO. OF LANES: 2
FUNC-CLASS: 16 HPMS NO:
STATION NO: 4936 LION#:
COUNT TAKEN BY: ORG CODE: TST INITIALS: BJF
PROCESSED BY: ORG CODE: DOT INITIALS: mab BATCH ID: DOT-R1ww40bDIRECTION
NUMBER OF VEHICLES
NUMBER OF AXLES
% HEAVY VEHICLES (F4-F13)
% TRUCKS AND BUSES (F3-F13)
AXLE CORRECTION FACTORNorth
5197
10447
2.91%
20.63%
0.99South
5844
11753
5.30%
23.13%
0.99TOTAL
11041
22200
4.18%
21.95%
0.99
VEHICLE CLASS F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F9 F10 F11 F12 F13 TOTAL
NO. OF AXLES 2 2 2 2.5 2 3 4 3.5 5 6 5 6 8.75
ENDING HOUR
DIRECTION
North
ENDING HOUR
DIRECTION
South1:00 0 20 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
23
2:00 0 7 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10
3:00 0 9 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11
4:00 0 18 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
21
5:00 0 39 11 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
51
6:00 1 52 14 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
69
7:00 1 79 22 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
104
8:00 3 225 45 2 8 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
286
9:00 2 284 70 0 8 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
366
10:00 3 271 70 0 14 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
361
11:00 3 262 68 0 9 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
345
12:00 7 280 69 1 8 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
369
13:00 6 352 69 1 10 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
441
14:00 5 335 71 1 7 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
420
15:00 5 283 66 1 9 3 1 1 1 1 0 0 0
371
16:00 9 328 77 0 8 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
424
17:00 5 331 67 0 7 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
413
18:00 4 289 67 0 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
367
19:00 3 192 46 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
245
20:00 0 141 36 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
181
21:00 0 109 19 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
131
22:00 1 79 10 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
91
23:00 0 53 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
60
24:00 0 29 6 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
37
TOTAL VEHICLES
TOTAL AXLES58
1164067
8134921
18428
20109
21820
602
88
283
151
60
00
00
05197
10447
1:00 0 24 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
28
2:00 0 18 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
20
3:00 0 6 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
9
4:00 0 11 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
13
5:00 0 13 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
16
6:00 1 35 11 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
51
7:00 1 81 18 0 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
106
8:00 4 165 45 2 19 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
238
9:00 3 222 52 0 17 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
297
10:00 2 211 74 0 19 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0
310
11:00 3 255 80 0 22 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
362
12:00 7 299 83 1 17 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
411
13:00 7 373 78 2 19 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
484
14:00 5 351 94 2 19 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
475
15:00 4 377 102 0 19 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0
506
16:00 5 355 84 1 22 4 0 3 0 0 0 0 0
474
17:00 5 394 80 0 23 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
506
18:00 5 358 73 0 12 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
451
19:00 4 271 51 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
340
20:00 1 189 41 0 10 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
242
21:00 2 156 24 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
188
22:00 1 132 18 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
155
23:00 1 93 13 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
110
24:00 0 42 8 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
52
TOTAL VEHICLES
TOTAL AXLES61
1224431
88621042
20848
20254
50830
900
015
523
150
00
00
00
05844
11753
GRAND TOTAL VEHICLES
GRAND TOTAL AXLES119
2388498
169961963
3926
16
40363
72650
1502
823
806
301
60
00
00
011041
22200
— North – -South
PEAK HOUR DATA
DIRECTION HOUR COUNT 2-WAY HOUR COUNT
North 13 441 A.M. 12 780
South 15 506 P.M. 13 925VEHICLE CLASSIFICATION CODES:
F1. Motorcycles
F2. Autos*
F3. 2 Axle, 4-Tire Pickups, Vans, Motorhomes*
F4. Buses
F5. 2 Axle, 6-Tire Single Unit Trucks
F6. 3 Axle Single Unit Trucks
F7. 4 or More Axle Single Unit Trucks
F8. 4 or Less Axle Vehicles, One Unit is a Truck
F9. 5 Axle Double Unit Vehicles, One Unit is a Truck
F10. 6 or More Double Unit Vehicles, One Unit is a Truck
F11. 5 or Less Axle Multi-Unit Trucks
F12. 6 Axle Multi-Unit Trucks
F13. 7 or More Axle Multi-Unit Trucks
* INCLUDING THOSE HAULING TRAILERS
FUNCTIONAL CLASS CODES:
RURAL URBAN SYSTEM
01
02
02
06
07
08
0911
12
14
16
17
17
19PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL-INTERSTATE
PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL-EXPRESSWAY
PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL-OTHER
MINOR ARTERIAL
MAJOR COLLECTOR
MINOR COLLECTOR
LOCAL SYSTEM
SOURCE: NYSDOT DATA SERVICES BUREAU

— North
– – South
New York State Department of Transportation Page 1 of 2
Speed Count Average Weekday Report Date: 12/09/2010
Station: 174936 Start date: Fri 10/01/2010 10:00 Count duration: 147 hours
Road #: 0100 Road name: BAY ST End date: Thu 10/07/2010 12:45 Functional class: 16
From: SANFORD ST County: Warren Factor group: 30
To: CITY LINE Town: GLENS FALLS Batch ID: DOT-R1ww40b
Direction: NorthCount taken by: Org: TST Init: BJF Speed limit: 30
LION#: Processed by: Org: DOT Init: mab
Counts have been summarized into NYSDOT EI standard bins
Speeds, mph
0.0- 20.1- 25.1- 30.1- 35.1- 40.1- 45.1- 50.1- 55.1- 60.1- 65.1- 70.1- 75.1- % Exc % Exc % Exc % Exc % Exc
Hour 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 70.0 75.0 95.0 45.0 50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 Avg 50th% 85th% Total
1:00 1 2 4 10610000000 0.00.00.00.00.030.0 32.6 37.9 24
2:00 0016300000000 0.00.00.00.00.033.2 33.4 37.6 10
3:00 0115320000000 0.00.00.00.00.033.2 34.0 40.6 12
4:00 0 0 2 12510000000 0.00.00.00.00.033.4 33.4 38.0 20
5:00 0 2 8 25 16 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 32.5 33.2 37.9 52
6:00 3 3 10 33 18 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.5 32.9 37.7 69
7:00 5 6 16 48 24 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.2 32.7 38.0 105
8:00 12 14 72 126 52 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.6 31.8 36.8 285
9:00 17 26 91 171 55 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.1 31.5 35.7 367
10:00 15 18 92 172 58 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.5 31.7 36.0 362
11:00 19 28 99 149 45 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.4 31.0 35.0 346
12:00 22 21 100 170 50 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.5 31.3 35.1 369
13:00 31 17 145 202 46 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.0 30.8 34.6 443
14:00 34 25 142 171 46 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 27.4 30.4 34.7 424
15:00 24 19 100 172 48 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.4 31.3 35.0 370
16:00 23 28 113 194 58 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.7 31.3 35.3 425
17:00 22 13 91 206 77 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.5 32.0 36.3 413
18:00 23 23 69 181 65 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.9 32.0 36.4 369
19:00 9 14 66 113 38 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.5 31.5 35.9 245
20:00 8 14 37 87 32 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.3 31.9 36.3 181
21:00 4 10 32 54 27 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.9 31.9 37.2 131
22:00 5 5 18 40 19 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.5 32.2 37.5 91
23:00 1 5 11 26 17 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.9 32.6 37.7 61
24:00 0 3 7 18721000000 2.60.00.00.00.031.8 32.6 38.1 38
Avg. Daily Total 278 297 1327 2391 815 95 9 0 0 0 0 0 05212 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.0 31.5 35.9
Percent
Cum. Percent
Average hour5.3%
5.3%
125.7%
11.0%
1225.5%
36.5%
5545.9%
82.4%
10015.6%
98.0%
341.8%
99.8%
40.2%
100.0%
00.0%
100.0%
00.0%
100.0%
00.0%
100.0%
00.0%
100.0%
00.0%
100.0%
00.0%
100.0%
0217
Avg. Speed 50th% Speed 85th% Speed
North 29.0 31.5 35.9
South 28.8 31.6 36.8
Peak Hour Data
Direction Hour Count 2-way Hour Count
North 13 443 A.M. 12 780
South 17 506 P.M. 13 928

— North
– – South New York State Department of Transportation Page 2 of 2
Speed Count Average Weekday Report Date: 12/09/2010
Station: 174936 Start date: Fri 10/01/2010 10:00 Count duration: 147 hours
Road #: 0100 Road name: BAY ST End date: Thu 10/07/2010 12:45 Functional class: 16
From: SANFORD ST County: Warren Factor group: 30
To: CITY LINE Town: GLENS FALLS Batch ID: DOT-R1ww40b
Direction: SouthCount taken by: Org: TST Init: BJF Speed limit: 30
LION#: Processed by: Org: DOT Init: mab
Counts have been summarized into NYSDOT EI standard bins
Speeds, mph
0.0- 20.1- 25.1- 30.1- 35.1- 40.1- 45.1- 50.1- 55.1- 60.1- 65.1- 70.1- 75.1- % Exc % Exc % Exc % Exc % Exc
Hour 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 70.0 75.0 95.0 45.0 50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 Avg 50th% 85th% Total
1:00 0 0 5 14710000000 0.00.00.00.00.032.8 33.1 37.9 27
2:00 1149500000000 0.00.00.00.00.029.6 32.3 37.0 20
3:00 0014210000000 0.00.00.00.00.033.9 33.8 39.6 8
4:00 0144410000000 0.00.00.00.00.031.6 32.6 38.7 14
5:00 1 0 4 10100000000 0.00.00.00.00.028.8 31.6 34.4 16
6:00 3 2 8 24 13 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.8 32.7 37.5 51
7:00 4 8 12 46 27 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.7 33.1 38.6 105
8:00 17 25 50 88 50 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.3 31.6 37.4 240
9:00 14 21 61 120 65 14 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.7 32.2 37.9 297
10:00 20 17 73 130 62 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.9 31.8 37.0 311
11:00 20 27 96 151 61 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.7 31.3 36.2 363
12:00 30 28 105 170 66 11 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.2 31.3 36.3 411
13:00 36 36 131 192 83 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.0 31.1 36.1 485
14:00 42 36 122 186 82 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 27.6 31.1 36.2 477
15:00 34 46 132 200 80 11 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.1 31.1 36.1 505
16:00 33 30 119 202 79 11 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.4 31.4 36.4 476
17:00 26 39 118 221 89 12 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.0 31.6 36.5 506
18:00 24 30 104 195 85 12 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.1 31.8 36.8 451
19:00 16 30 81 146 59 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.0 31.5 36.5 341
20:00 6 16 50 123 41 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.3 32.1 36.5 243
21:00 8 14 39 86 35 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.6 32.0 36.9 188
22:00 5 9 26 67 39 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.7 32.8 38.0 153
23:00 2 7 15 50 30 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 31.6 33.2 38.3 110
24:00 2 2 10 25 10 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.3 32.4 37.2 51
Avg. Daily Total 344 425 1370 2463 1075 158 13 1 0 0 0 0 05849 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.8 31.6 36.8
Percent
Cum. Percent
Average hour5.9%
5.9%
147.3%
13.1%
1823.4%
36.6%
5742.1%
78.7%
10318.4%
97.1%
452.7%
99.8%
70.2%
100.0%
10.0%
100.0%
00.0%
100.0%
00.0%
100.0%
00.0%
100.0%
00.0%
100.0%
00.0%
100.0%
0244
Avg. Speed 50th% Speed 85th% Speed
North 29.0 31.5 35.9
South 28.8 31.6 36.8
Peak Hour Data
Direction Hour Count 2-way Hour Count
North 13 443 A.M. 12 780
South 17 506 P.M. 13 928

STATION:
174954 New York State Department of Transportation
Traffic Count Hourly Report
Page 1 of 2
ROAD #:
0100ROAD NAME:
BAY ST FROM:
WASHINGTON ST TO:
SANFORD ST COUNTY:
Warren
DIRECTION: Northbound FACTOR GROUP: 30 REC. SERIAL #: 0051 FUNC. CLASS: 16 CITY:
GLENS FALLS
STATE DIR CODE: 1 WK OF YR: 47 PLACEMENT: 81FT SOUTH OF HUNTER NHS: no LION#:
DATE OF COUNT: 11/16/2010 @ REF MARKER: JURIS: City BIN:
NOTES LANE 1: WEEK 47 NB ADDL DATA: CC Stn: RR CROSSING:
COUNT TYPE: AXLE PAIRS BATCH ID: DOT-R1_SC_WW47 HPMS SAMPLE:
COUNT TAKEN BY: ORG CODE: TST INITIALS: BJF PROCESSED BY: ORG CODE: DOT INITIALS: JSR
12
TO
11
TO
22
TO
33
TO
44
TO
55
TO
66
TO
77
TO
88
TO
99
TO
1010
TO
1111
TO
1212
TO
11
TO
22
TO
33
TO
44
TO
55
TO
66
TO
77
TO
88
TO
99
TO
1010
TO
1111
TO
12DAILY DAILY
DAILY HIGH HIGH
AMPM
DATE
DAY
TOTAL
COUNT
HOUR
1M
2T
3W
4T
5F
6S
7S
8M
9T
10 W
11 T
12 F
13 S
14 S
15 M
16 T
17 W
18 T
19 F
20 S
21 S
22 M
23 T
24 W
25 T
26 F
27 S
28 S
29 M
30 T377 303 479 387 371 437 402 390 226 154 147 114 69 49
17 16 11 18 52 60 77 240 402 299 351 354 440 433 394 468 522 391 246 202 135 96 62 375323 522 16
29 11 12 22 42 59 86 255 364 339 329 377 473 391 406 457 470 399 258 196 146 100 88 525361 473 12
21 19 21 29 61 46 74 245 352 357 347 385 427 399 420 449 416 362 222 198 168 129 92 745313 449 15
57 32 22 21 15 26 40 85 121 218 307 339 299 266 266 204 244 239 153 158 116 95 84 543461 339 11
40 31 26 22 10 25 26 58 92 117 176 219 225 163 219 243 215 177 136 116 114 60 48 342592 243 15
19 12 13 20 38 48 80 252 397
AVERAGE WEEKDAY HOURS (Axle Factored, Mon 6AM to Fri Noon) ADT
22 15 15 22 51 54 77 243 371 325 343 347 454 395 381 444 455 384 238 180 140 101 71 45 5173
DAYS
Counted
7HOURS
Counted
143WEEKDAYS
Counted
4WEEKDAY
Hours
77AVERAGE WEEKDAY
High Hour
455% of day
9%Axle Adj.
Factor
0.978Seasonal/Weekday
Adjustment Factor
1.030ESTIMATED (one way)
AADT
5022
ROAD #:
0100ROAD NAME:
BAY ST FROM:
WASHINGTON ST TO:
SANFORD ST COUNTY:
Warren
STATION:
174954STATE DIR CODE:
1PLACEMENT:
81FT SOUTH OF HUNTER DATE OF COUNT: 11/16/2010

STATION:
174954 New York State Department of Transportation
Traffic Count Hourly Report
Page 2 of 2
ROAD #:
0100ROAD NAME:
BAY ST FROM:
WASHINGTON ST TO:
SANFORD ST COUNTY:
Warren
DIRECTION: Southbound FACTOR GROUP: 30 REC. SERIAL #: 0098 FUNC. CLASS: 16 CITY:
GLENS FALLS
STATE DIR CODE: 2 WK OF YR: 47 PLACEMENT: 81FT SOUTH OF HUNTER NHS: no LION#:
DATE OF COUNT: 11/16/2010 @ REF MARKER: JURIS: City BIN:
NOTES LANE 1: WEEK 47 SB ADDL DATA: CC Stn: RR CROSSING:
COUNT TYPE: AXLE PAIRS BATCH ID: DOT-R1_SC_WW47 HPMS SAMPLE:
COUNT TAKEN BY: ORG CODE: TST INITIALS: BJF PROCESSED BY: ORG CODE: DOT INITIALS: JSR
12
TO
11
TO
22
TO
33
TO
44
TO
55
TO
66
TO
77
TO
88
TO
99
TO
1010
TO
1111
TO
1212
TO
11
TO
22
TO
33
TO
44
TO
55
TO
66
TO
77
TO
88
TO
99
TO
1010
TO
1111
TO
12DAILY DAILY
DAILY HIGH HIGH
AMPM
DATE
DAY
TOTAL
COUNT
HOUR
1M
2T
3W
4T
5F
6S
7S
8M
9T
10 W
11 T
12 F
13 S
14 S
15 M
16 T
17 W
18 T
19 F
20 S
21 S
22 M
23 T
24 W
25 T
26 F
27 S
28 S
29 M
30 T296 436 407 434 463 474 427 391 258 185 149 138 85 49
24 16 8 21 15 61 118 246 322 329 325 382 489 446 495 495 501 437 277 206 193 173 95 335707 501 16
19 13 13 19 16 65 108 243 340 306 305 409 427 531 475 505 490 451 294 209 187 155 93 465719 531 13
35 17 22 13 18 67 108 233 348 392 387 451 448 464 441 472 451 394 277 188 191 172 101 755765 472 15
56 29 18 14 16 27 57 89 134 258 288 328 311 274 288 317 254 248 200 178 164 117 112 603837 328 11
46 22 26 19 15 21 32 78 104 154 200 215 292 211 251 238 210 197 182 161 110 69 58 272938 292 12
20 11 11 15 14 68 124 243 348
AVERAGE WEEKDAY HOURS (Axle Factored, Mon 6AM to Fri Noon) ADT
25 15 14 18 16 63 111 236 333 334 321 411 431 460 467 480 463 417 270 196 172 152 89 42 5536
DAYS
Counted
7HOURS
Counted
143WEEKDAYS
Counted
4WEEKDAY
Hours
77AVERAGE WEEKDAY
High Hour
480% of day
9%Axle Adj.
Factor
0.978Seasonal/Weekday
Adjustment Factor
1.030ESTIMATED (one way)
AADT
5375
ROAD #:
0100ROAD NAME:
BAY ST FROM:
WASHINGTON ST TO:
SANFORD ST COUNTY:
Warren
STATION:
174954STATE DIR CODE:
2PLACEMENT:
81FT SOUTH OF HUNTER DATE OF COUNT: 11/16/2010

STATION:
174951 New York State Department of Transportation
Traffic Count Hourly Report
Page 1 of 2
ROAD #:
1930ROAD NAME:
SANFORD ST FROM:
BAY ST TO:
RIDGE ST COUNTY:
Warren
DIRECTION: Eastbound FACTOR GROUP: 30 REC. SERIAL #: 0060 FUNC. CLASS: 16 CITY:
GLENS FALLS
STATE DIR CODE: 1 WK OF YR: 39 PLACEMENT: 150FT WEST OF RIDGE ST NHS: no LION#:
DATE OF COUNT: 09/22/2010 @ REF MARKER: JURIS: City BIN:
NOTES LANE 1: WEEK 39 EB ADDL DATA: CC Stn: RR CROSSING:
COUNT TYPE: AXLE PAIRS BATCH ID: DOT-DOTWW39b HPMS SAMPLE:
COUNT TAKEN BY: ORG CODE: TST INITIALS: BJF PROCESSED BY: ORG CODE: DOT INITIALS: JSR
12
TO
11
TO
22
TO
33
TO
44
TO
55
TO
66
TO
77
TO
88
TO
99
TO
1010
TO
1111
TO
1212
TO
11
TO
22
TO
33
TO
44
TO
55
TO
66
TO
77
TO
88
TO
99
TO
1010
TO
1111
TO
12DAILY DAILY
DAILY HIGH HIGH
AMPM
DATE
DAY
TOTAL
COUNT
HOUR
1W
2T
3F
4S
5S
6M
7T
8W
9T
10 F
11 S
12 S
13 M
14 T
15 W
16 T
17 F
18 S
19 S
20 M
21 T
22 W
23 T
24 F
25 S
26 S
27 M
28 T
29 W
30 T96 110 115 139 102 95 128 159 126 99 58 60 35 19
152195204813715288113117124150156177161179232148746527192219 232 18
935362256140166124121120157153164172211186144108918363272334 211 16
13 6 5 6 27 48 38 46 68 101 139 147 134 141 134 156 173 121 121 86 60 72 47 291918 173 16
18 10 9 9 13 45 32 33 45 87 93 101 132 99 109 110 108 107 111 67 63 21 23 131458 132 12
83365235614813499899812313016217311716511170735124121883 173 15
7542421471461439775
AVERAGE WEEKDAY HOURS (Axle Factored, Mon 6AM to Fri Noon) ADT
103355215114014610097109118137137145132164153104675828171950
DAYS
Counted
7HOURS
Counted
145WEEKDAYS
Counted
4WEEKDAY
Hours
79AVERAGE WEEKDAY
High Hour
164% of day
8%Axle Adj.
Factor
0.978Seasonal/Weekday
Adjustment Factor
1.074ESTIMATED (one way)
AADT
1816
ROAD #:
1930ROAD NAME:
SANFORD ST FROM:
BAY ST TO:
RIDGE ST COUNTY:
Warren
STATION:
174951STATE DIR CODE:
1PLACEMENT:
150FT WEST OF RIDGE ST DATE OF COUNT: 09/22/2010

STATION:
174951 New York State Department of Transportation
Traffic Count Hourly Report
Page 2 of 2
ROAD #:
1930ROAD NAME:
SANFORD ST FROM:
BAY ST TO:
RIDGE ST COUNTY:
Warren
DIRECTION: Westbound FACTOR GROUP: 30 REC. SERIAL #: 0060 FUNC. CLASS: 16 CITY:
GLENS FALLS
STATE DIR CODE: 2 WK OF YR: 39 PLACEMENT: 150FT WEST OF RIDGE ST NHS: no LION#:
DATE OF COUNT: 09/22/2010 @ REF MARKER: JURIS: City BIN:
NOTES LANE 1: WEEK 39 WB ADDL DATA: CC Stn: RR CROSSING:
COUNT TYPE: AXLE PAIRS BATCH ID: DOT-DOTWW39b HPMS SAMPLE:
COUNT TAKEN BY: ORG CODE: TST INITIALS: BJF PROCESSED BY: ORG CODE: DOT INITIALS: JSR
12
TO
11
TO
22
TO
33
TO
44
TO
55
TO
66
TO
77
TO
88
TO
99
TO
1010
TO
1111
TO
1212
TO
11
TO
22
TO
33
TO
44
TO
55
TO
66
TO
77
TO
88
TO
99
TO
1010
TO
1111
TO
12DAILY DAILY
DAILY HIGH HIGH
AMPM
DATE
DAY
TOTAL
COUNT
HOUR
1W
2T
3F
4S
5S
6M
7T
8W
9T
10 F
11 S
12 S
13 M
14 T
15 W
16 T
17 F
18 S
19 S
20 M
21 T
22 W
23 T
24 F
25 S
26 S
27 M
28 T
29 W
30 T121 121 115 149 147 184 182 191 120 92 75 55 31 21
886431029105126102127116141119172210251240125125935422212217 251 16
98344830120148117148140149133177205210169186154889285462433 210 16
261486551650109130140133168168116148148129132137828162352048 168 12
168787915287090901281151181171291289412488604121191530 129 15
6526211301001208211112311511714917216617411885592829191829 174 17
108552103210614110592
AVERAGE WEEKDAY HOURS (Axle Factored, Mon 6AM to Fri Noon) ADT
9854392910613110011712212112515318519619811899744526202003
DAYS
Counted
7HOURS
Counted
145WEEKDAYS
Counted
4WEEKDAY
Hours
79AVERAGE WEEKDAY
High Hour
198% of day
10%Axle Adj.
Factor
0.978Seasonal/Weekday
Adjustment Factor
1.074ESTIMATED (one way)
AADT
1865
ROAD #:
1930ROAD NAME:
SANFORD ST FROM:
BAY ST TO:
RIDGE ST COUNTY:
Warren
STATION:
174951STATE DIR CODE:
2PLACEMENT:
150FT WEST OF RIDGE ST DATE OF COUNT: 09/22/2010

File Name : GREEN
Site Code : 12111111
Start Date : 7/30/2013
Page No : 1AGFTC
SAFETY STUDY
PM
4 TO 6
Groups Printed- PASSENGER CARS – SU TRUCKS & BUSES – MU TRUCKS
From North From East From South From West
Start Time
Right Thru Left Peds
App. Total Right Thru Left Peds
App. Total Right Thru Left Peds
App. Total Right Thru Left Peds
App. Total Int. Total
04:00 PM 9 76 5 1 91 4 36 5 1 46 4 80 12 1 97 12 14 7 0 33 267
04:15 PM 10 100 7 1 118 10 32 5 0 47 3 73 8 2 86 7 20 6 0 33 284
04:30 PM 10 91 6 3 110 9 39 7 0 55 5 90 14 3 112 7 30 7 0 44 321
04:45 PM 9 71 11 0 91 3 30 4 0 37 6 90 11 2 109 5 26 10 0 41 278
Total 38 338 29 5 410 26 137 21 1 185 18 333 45 8 404 31 90 30 0 151 1150
05:00 PM 11 95 5 3 114 7 27 2 2 38 10 85 13 5 113 9 31 8 2 50 315
05:15 PM 9 96 5 1 111 9 35 6 1 51 7 80 7 7 101 11 16 4 0 31 294
05:30 PM 7 82 4 4 97 7 18 6 0 31 5 53 10 3 71 7 28 7 2 44 243
05:45 PM 9 80 7 0 96 5 30 3 1 39 10 51 4 2 67 5 19 1 1 26 228
Total 36 353 21 8 418 28 110 17 4 159 32 269 34 17 352 32 94 20 5 151 1080
Grand Total 74 691 50 13 828 54 247 38 5 344 50 602 79 25 756 63 184 50 5 302 2230
Apprch % 8.9 83.5 6 1.6 15.7 71.8 11 1.5 6.6 79.6 10.4 3.3 20.9 60.9 16.6 1.7
Total % 3.3 31 2.2 0.6 37.1 2.4 11.1 1.7 0.2 15.4 2.2 27 3.5 1.1 33.9 2.8 8.3 2.2 0.2 13.5
PASSENGER CARS 74 683 49 13 819 54 246 38 5 343 50 598 78 25 751 63 183 50 5 301 2214
% PASSENGER CARS 100 98.8 98 100 98.9 100 99.6 100 100 99.7 100 99.3 98.7 100 99.3 100 99.5 100 100 99.7 99.3
SU TRUCKS & BUSES 0 8 1 0 9 0 1 0 0 1 0 3 1 0 4 0 1 0 0 1 15
% SU TRUCKS & BUSES 0 1.2 2 0 1.1 0 0.4 0 0 0.3 0 0.5 1.3 0 0.5 0 0.5 0 0 0.3 0.7
MU TRUCKS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
% MU TRUCKS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0 0 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0

File Name : GREEN
Site Code : 12111111
Start Date : 7/30/2013
Page No : 2AGFTC
SAFETY STUDY
PM
4 TO 6

Right 74
0
0
74
Thru 683
8
0
691
Left 49
1
0
50
Peds 13
0
0
13 InOut Total
702 819 1521
3 9 12
1 0 1
706
1534
828
Right54 0 0 54
Thru246 1 0 247
Left38 0 0 38
Peds
5 0 0 5
Out
Total
In
282
343
625
2
1
3
0
0
0
284
628
344
Left
78
1
0
79 Thru
598
3
1
602 Right
50
0
0
50 Peds
25
0
0
25
Out TotalIn784 751 1535
8 4 12
0 1 1
792 1548 756
Left50 0 0 50
Thru183 1 0 184
Right63 0 0 63
Peds
5 0 0 5
Total
Out
In
398
301
699
2
1
3
0
0
0
400
702
302 7/30/2013 04:00 PM
7/30/2013 05:45 PM

PASSENGER CARS
SU TRUCKS & BUSES
MU TRUCKS North

File Name : GREEN
Site Code : 12111111
Start Date : 7/30/2013
Page No : 3AGFTC
SAFETY STUDY
PM
4 TO 6
From North From East From South From West
Start Time
Right Thru Left Peds
App. Total Right Thru Left Peds
App. Total Right Thru Left Peds
App. Total Right Thru Left Peds
App. Total Int. Total
Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM – Peak 1 of 1
Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM
04:30 PM 10 91 6
3 110
9 39 7 0
55 5
90 14 3 112 7 30 7 0 44
321
04:45 PM 9 71
11 0 91 3 30 4 0 37 6 90 11 2 109 5 26
10 0 41 278
05:00 PM
11 95 5 3
114 7 27 2
2 38
10 85 13 5
113 9
31 8
2 50 315
05:15 PM 9
96 5 1 111 9 35 6 1 51 7 80 7
7 101
11 16 4 0 31 294
Total Volume 39 353 27 7 426 28 131 19 3 181 28 345 45 17 435 32 103 29 2 166 1208
% App. Total 9.2 82.9 6.3 1.6 15.5 72.4 10.5 1.7 6.4 79.3 10.3 3.9 19.3 62 17.5 1.2
PHF .886 .919 .614 .583 .934 .778 .840 .679 .375 .823 .700 .958 .804 .607 .962 .727 .831 .725 .250 .830 .941
PASSENGER CARS 39 350 27 7 423 28 131 19 3 181 28 344 45 17 434 32 102 29 2 165 1203
% PASSENGER CARS 100 99.2 100 100 99.3 100 100 100 100 100 100 99.7 100 100 99.8 100 99.0 100 100 99.4 99.6
SU TRUCKS & BUSES 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 5
% SU TRUCKS & BUSES 0 0.8 0 0 0.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0 0 0.2 0 1.0 0 0 0.6 0.4
MU TRUCKS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
% MU TRUCKS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

File Name : GREEN
Site Code : 12111111
Start Date : 7/30/2013
Page No : 4AGFTC
SAFETY STUDY
PM
4 TO 6

Right 39
0
0
39
Thru 350
3
0
353
Left 27
0
0
27
Peds 7
0
0
7 InOut Total
401 423 824
1 3 4
0 0 0
402
828
426
Right28 0 0 28
Thru131 0 0 131
Left19 0 0 19
Peds
3 0 0 3
Out
Total
In
157
181
338
1
0
1
0
0
0
158
339
181
Left
45
0
0
45 Thru
344
1
0
345 Right
28
0
0
28 Peds
17
0
0
17
Out TotalIn401 434 835
3 1 4
0 0 0
404 839 435
Left29 0 0 29
Thru102 1 0 103
Right32 0 0 32
Peds
2 0 0 2
Total
Out
In
215
165
380
0
1
1
0
0
0
215
381
166 Peak Hour Begins at 04:30 PM

PASSENGER CARS
SU TRUCKS & BUSES
MU TRUCKSPeak Hour Data
North

File Name : BLUE
Site Code : 11111222
Start Date : 7/30/2013
Page No : 1AGFTC
SAFTEY STUDY
PM
4 TO 6
Groups Printed- PASSENGER CARS – SU TRUCKS & BUSES – MU TRUCKS
From North From East From South From West
Start Time
Right Thru Left Peds
App. Total Right Thru Left Peds
App. Total Right Thru Left Peds
App. Total Right Thru Left Peds
App. Total Int. Total
04:00 PM 0 0 5 0 5 13 0 2 0 15 4 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 24
04:15 PM 0 0 5 0 5 9 0 3 0 12 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 20
04:30 PM 0 0 6 1 7 5 0 0 0 5 4 0 1 4 9 0 0 0 2 2 23
04:45 PM 0 0 6 4 10 5 0 1 0 6 2 0 0 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 20
Total 0 0 22 5 27 32 0 6 0 38 13 0 1 6 20 0 0 0 2 2 87
05:00 PM 0 0 8 3 11 9 0 0 0 9 3 0 0 3 6 0 0 0 0 0 26
05:15 PM 0 0 7 1 8 7 0 1 0 8 2 0 0 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 20
Grand Total 0 0 37 9 46 48 0 7 0 55 18 0 1 11 30 0 0 0 2 2 133
Apprch % 0 0 80.4 19.6 87.3 0 12.7 0 60 0 3.3 36.7 0 0 0 100
Total % 0 0 27.8 6.8 34.6 36.1 0 5.3 0 41.4 13.5 0 0.8 8.3 22.6 0 0 0 1.5 1.5
PASSENGER CARS 0 0 36 9 45 48 0 7 0 55 18 0 1 11 30 0 0 0 2 2 132
% PASSENGER CARS 0 0 97.3 100 97.8 100 0 100 0 100 100 0 100 100 100 0 0 0 100 100 99.2
SU TRUCKS & BUSES 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
% SU TRUCKS & BUSES 0 0 2.7 0 2.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.8
MU TRUCKS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
% MU TRUCKS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

File Name : BLUE
Site Code : 11111222
Start Date : 7/30/2013
Page No : 2AGFTC
SAFTEY STUDY
PM
4 TO 6

Right 0
0
0
0
Thru 0
0
0
0
Left 36
1
0
37
Peds 9
0
0
9 InOut Total
48 45 93
0 1 1
0 0 0
48
94
46
Right48 0 0 48
Thru
0 0 0 0
Left
7 0 0 7 Peds
0 0 0 0
Out
Total
In
54
55
109
1
0
1
0
0
0
55
110
55
Left
1
0
0
1 Thru
0
0
0
0 Right
18
0
0
18 Peds
11
0
0
11
Out TotalIn7 30 37
0 0 0
0 0 0
7 37 30
Left
0 0 0 0
Thru
0 0 0 0
Right
0 0 0 0
Peds
2 0 0 2
Total
Out
In
1
2
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
3
2 7/30/2013 04:00 PM
7/30/2013 05:15 PM

PASSENGER CARS
SU TRUCKS & BUSES
MU TRUCKS North

File Name : BLUE
Site Code : 11111222
Start Date : 7/30/2013
Page No : 3AGFTC
SAFTEY STUDY
PM
4 TO 6
From North From East From South From West
Start Time
Right Thru Left Peds
App. Total Right Thru Left Peds
App. Total Right Thru Left Peds
App. Total Right Thru Left Peds
App. Total Int. Total
Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:15 PM – Peak 1 of 1
Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:15 PM
04:15 PM 0 0 5 0 5
9 0
3 0
12 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 20
04:30 PM 0 0 6 1 7 5 0 0 0 5
4 0
1 4 9 0 0 0
2 2 23
04:45 PM 0 0 6
4 10 5 0 1 0 6 2 0 0 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 20
05:00 PM 0 0
8 3
11 9 0 0 0 9 3 0 0 3 6 0 0 0 0 0
26
Total Volume 0 0 25 8 33 28 0 4 0 32 12 0 1 9 22 0 0 0 2 2 89
% App. Total 0 0 75.8 24.2 87.5 0 12.5 0 54.5 0 4.5 40.9 0 0 0 100
PHF .000 .000 .781 .500 .750 .778 .000 .333 .000 .667 .750 .000 .250 .563 .611 .000 .000 .000 .250 .250 .856
PASSENGER CARS 0 0 24 8 32 28 0 4 0 32 12 0 1 9 22 0 0 0 2 2 88
% PASSENGER CARS 0 0 96.0 100 97.0 100 0 100 0 100 100 0 100 100 100 0 0 0 100 100 98.9
SU TRUCKS & BUSES 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
% SU TRUCKS & BUSES 0 0 4.0 0 3.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.1
MU TRUCKS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
% MU TRUCKS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

File Name : BLUE
Site Code : 11111222
Start Date : 7/30/2013
Page No : 4AGFTC
SAFTEY STUDY
PM
4 TO 6

Right 0
0
0
0
Thru 0
0
0
0
Left 24
1
0
25
Peds 8
0
0
8 InOut Total
28 32 60
0 1 1
0 0 0
28
61
33
Right28 0 0 28
Thru
0 0 0 0
Left
4 0 0 4 Peds
0 0 0 0
Out
Total
In
36
32
68
1
0
1
0
0
0
37
69
32
Left
1
0
0
1 Thru
0
0
0
0 Right
12
0
0
12 Peds
9
0
0
9
Out TotalIn4 22 26
0 0 0
0 0 0
4 26 22
Left
0 0 0 0
Thru
0 0 0 0
Right
0 0 0 0
Peds
2 0 0 2
Total
Out
In
1
2
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
3
2 Peak Hour Begins at 04:15 PM

PASSENGER CARS
SU TRUCKS & BUSES
MU TRUCKSPeak Hour Data
North