Publication Type: Transportation Plans

Resource Systems Group, Inc.
60 Lake Street, Suite 1E

Burlington, VT 05401
TEL 802.295.4999 | FAX 802.295.1006
www.rsginc.com

Glens Falls School District
Traffic Circulation Study

Technical Report
August 9, 2012
Prepared for
Glens Falls School District and
Adirondack / Glens Falls
Transportation Council
Prepared
by
Resource Systems Group, Inc.

i

Table of Contents
1 . 0 I n t r o d u c t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 Study Area …………………………………. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 1
1.1.1 School Characteristics ………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………….. 2
1.1.2 Adjacent Street Network ……………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………. 2
1.1.3 Travel Options to School …………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………….. 4
1.1.4 Pick-up and Drop-off Procedures ………………. ……………………………………………………………………………. 4
1.2 Purpose and Need ……………………………. …………………………………………………………………………………………………. 6
2 . 0 R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1 Short Term Recommendations …………………… …………………………………………………………………………………… 6
2.1.1 Expand Quade Street Drop-Off Area …………….. ………………………………………………………………………… 6
2.1.2 Shift Sherman Avenue Parking to North Side of Stree t ……………………………………………………….. 7
2.1.3 Encourage Counter Clockwise Circulation ……….. …………………………………………………………………… 8
2.1.4 Increase Temporary Barrier Ballast ……………. ………………………………………………………………………….. 8
2.1.5 Install All-Way Stop Controls at Shippey / Empire . ……………………………………………………………… 8
2.2 Long Term Streetscape Enhancements ……………. ……………………………………………………………………………. 9
2.2.1 Improve City Sidewalk Network ………………… ……………………………………………………………………………. 9
2.2.2 Automatic Quade Street Closure Features ……….. ……………………………………………………………………. 9
2.2.3 Quade Street – Sherman Avenue Loop ……………. ……………………………………………………………………. 10
2.3 Programmatic Strategies ……………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………. 10
2.3.1 Promote Coordination with Transit …………….. ……………………………………………………………………….. 11
2.3.2 Participate in Active Transportation Encouragement Programs …………………………………….. 11
3 . 0 T r a f f i c O b s e r v a t i o n s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1
3.1 Observed Traffic Volumes …………………….. ………………………………………………………………………………………… 12
3.2 Tube Count Data Collection …………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………….. 15
3.3 Observed Vehicle Queues ……………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………… 15
3.4 Vehicle and Pedestrian Observation Summary …….. ……………………………………………………………………. 16
4 . 0 C r a s h A n a l y s i s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 6
4.1 Western Avenue / Sherman Avenue Intersection …… …………………………………………………………………. 17
4.2 Sherman Avenue / Quade Street Intersection …….. ……………………………………………………………………… 18
4.3 Quade Street / West Notre Dame Street Intersection ……………………………………………………………….. 18
4.4 Shippey Street / Empire Avenue / Harrison Avenue In tersection ………………………………………….. 18
4.5 Sherman Avenue Corridor ……………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………. 1 8
4.6 Quade Street Corridor ……………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 19
5 . 0 E f f e c t o f A l i g n e d S c h o o l D a y s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 9
5.1 Approximating the Existing Demand …………….. ……………………………………………………………………………… 19
5.2 Typical Glens Falls Street Traffic Characteristics ……………………………………………………………………….. 20
5.3 Isolating High School Related Traffic …………. …………………………………………………………………………………. 21
5.4 Effect of Aligned School Days ………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………….. 23
5.5 Sherman Avenue & Quade Street Intersection Analysis ……………………………………………………………. 25
5.6 Effect on Observed Vehicle Queuing ……………. ……………………………………………………………………………….. 26
5.7 Summary of Effects of Aligned School Days ……… …………………………………………………………………………. 27

Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Glens Falls School District Traffic Circulation Stu dy

ii August 9, 2012

6 . 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 7
6.1 Develop Alternate On-Street Pick-Up and Drop-Off Lo cations ………………………………………………… 27
6.1.1 Encourage the Use of Clayton Avenue and Grant Avenu e Entrance Points …………………… 28
6.1.2 Restrict Parking along Quade Street South of West N otre Dame Street ………………………… 28
6.1.3 Move the parking aisle along Sherman Avenue ……. …………………………………………………………….. 28
6.1.4 Encourage counter-clockwise circulation ……….. …………………………………………………………………… 28
6.2 Restrict Access to School Parking Lots…………. ………………………………………………………………………………. 29
6.3 Enhanced Temporary Street Closure Barriers …….. …………………………………………………………………….. 29
6.4 Construct New Site Circulation Patterns ……….. …………………………………………………………………………….. 30
6.4.1 Alternative 1: Sherman Avenue High School Loop …. ………………………………………………………….. 30
6.4.2 Alternative 2: Quade Street to Sherman Avenue Drop- Off ……………………………………………….. 30
6.4.3 Alternative 3: Grant Avenue Access Road ……….. …………………………………………………………………… 30
6.4.4 Alternative 4: Quade Street Middle School Loop …. …………………………………………………………….. 30
6.5 Increase the Percentage of Students that Walk / Bik e / Bus to School ………………………………….. 30
7 . 0 I m p l e m e n t a t i o n M a t r i x . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1

List of Figures
Figure 1: School campus within Glens Falls. ……. …………………………………………………………………………………………… 1
Figure 2: Glens Falls School District High School a nd Middle School Campuses. ………………………………….. 2
Figure 3: Street operational characteristics and in tersection controls near the study area campus. .. 3
Figure 4: Bus staging areas and primary entrances t o the high school and middle school. ………………… 3
Figure 5: Maintained pedestrian paths accessing the school campus. …………………………………………………….. 4
Figure 6: Schematic illustrating on-street parking, assigned student parking, and pick-up and drop-
off designated areas. (Not to scale) ………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 5
Figure 7: Recommended drop off area expansion, look ing south along Quade Street near High
School entrance. ……………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 7
Figure 8: Realigned parking on north side of Sherma n Avenue. ………………………………………………………………. 7
Figure 9: Short-term recommendations to enhance saf ety and reduce congestion at the Glens Falls
School District Campus. ……………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 8
Figure 10: A view of the recommended automatic gate s at Quade Street and West Notre Dame
Street. Similar treatments are recommended at Quade Street and Shippey Avenue. …………………………… 9
Figure 11: Potential high school drop-off loop. Req uired sidewalk reconstruction not illustrated. .. 10
Figure 12: Clean, colorful, and fun new bicycle rac ks may attract additional bicycle ridership.
Pictured: the Loop Rack from Muchi East. ………. ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 11
Figure 13: AM peak hour traffic volumes in the stud y area ……………………………………………………………………… 12
Figure 14: PM peak hour traffic volumes in the stud y area ……………………………………………………………………… 13
Figure 15: 15 minute volumes through three studied intersections along Quade Street in the AM
arrival period………………………………. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 14
Figure 16: 15 minute volumes through three studied intersections along Quade Street in the PM
arrival period………………………………. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 14

iii

Figure 17: Road volume data from street network adj acent to the school campus from January 18,
2012. ……………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 15
Figure 18: Reported vehicle collisions near the pro ject areas from 2008 to 2011. …………………………….. 17
Figure 19: Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study wee kday traffic calming data, July 28 – August 3,
2011. ……………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 20
Figure 20: One-hour incremental data from other nea rby Glens Falls City streets. ……………………………. 21
Figure 21: Approximate volume of the traffic relate d to the school campus along Quade Street and
Sherman Avenue. …………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 22
Figure 22: Approximate expected shift in volumes al ong Quade Street and Sherman Avenue under
aligned school days. ………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 22
Figure 23: Approximate anticipated volumes along Qu ade Street and Sherman Avenue under
aligned school days. ………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 23
Figure 24: Approximate anticipated volumes along Qu ade Street and Sherman Avenue under
aligned school days, with specific traffic peaks an notated. ……………………………………………………………………… 25
List of Tables
Table 1: Level-of-Service Criteria for Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections ………………………………. 26
Attachments
Attachment A: Conceptual Cost Estimates for Recomme nded Improvements
Attachment B: Off Street Parking and Drop-Off Expan sion Alternatives and Evaluation Comparison

Technical Report

Resource Systems Group, Inc. 1
Insights and Solutions for a Better World

1 . 0 IN T R O D U C T I O N
Resource Systems Group, Inc. was contracted by the
Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation
Council (A/GFTC) to evaluate and address site circu lation, vehicle access, and pedestrian safety
issues around the Glens Falls High School and Middl e School campus. Beginning in the 2012-2013
school year, the arrival departure times of the hig h school and middle school are to be aligned. The
objectives of this study include:

An evaluation of the current access patterns,

A projection of access issues under aligned arrival and dismissal times, and

Proposed short and long term congestion mitigation strategies with improvements to the
circulation patterns and bicycle and pedestrian saf ety considerations.
This report summarizes the methods of data collecti on, the analysis techniques, a review of the
alternatives investigated, and short-term and long- term recommendations. This study has been
organized into the following sections:
Section 1.0 – Introduction : Provides background information, explains the goa ls 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 – Recommendations: The short and long term recommendations are present ed early
in this report for those that are most interested i n the conclusions to be able to quickly and easily
reach this information.
Section 3.0 – Traffic Observations: Documents the data collection methodology and pres ents the
observed operational characteristics of the pick-up and drop-off periods.
Section 4.0 – Crash Analysis: Reviews the available crash records and documents a ny safety
hazards near the study area.
Section 5.0 – Effect of Aligned School Times: Discusses the methodology used to project the
resulting traffic under aligned school days and rev iews the resulting data.
Section 6.0 – Congestion Mitigation Strategies:
Presents the investigations into the various short- term
and long-term congestion mitigation strategies.
Section 7.0 – Implementation : Identifies the leader
and other partners that will participate in or supp ort
the implementation of the recommendations.
1 . 1 S t u dy A r e a
The study area for the circulation analysis surroun ds
the Glens Falls School District Campus in west-cent ral
Glens Falls, roughly bounded by Quade Street,
Sherman Avenue, Clayton Avenue, and Grant Avenue,
specifically focusing on the primary school entranc e
locations for the Middle and High Schools along Qua de
Street. Additionally, the intersections of Shippey Street
and West Notre Dame Street with Empire Avenue
were included in the evaluation.
Figure 1: School campus within Glens Falls.

Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Glens Falls School District Traffic Circulation Stu dy

2 August 9, 2012

1 . 1 . 1 S c h o o l C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
The Glens Falls School District campus serves as th e only public high school and middle school
facility in the City of Glens Falls. The High Schoo l and Middle School serves grades 9 – 12 and 5 – 8,
respectively. The High School serves approximately 770 students and Middle School student
population numbers at around 575 pupils. This
difference in student population is a combination
of unusually high and low class sizes in the High
School and Middle School respectively and not
indicative of a declining population. In recent
years, the population of the city has declined but
is currently stable. Future classes, currently in
grades 1 – 4, total approximately 650 students.
The school campus hosts a variety of facilities for
extracurricular activities. Along with the many
classrooms and academic facilities, the campus
contains a theater, several athletic fields and
practice grounds, including an indoor
gymnasium, a joint football and soccer field, an
outdoor track, a practice baseball diamond, and
batting cages. The nearby Morse Athletic
Complex, west of the campus along Sherman
Avenue, provides additional recreational
opportunities.
1 . 1 . 2 A d j a c e n t S t r e e t N e t w o r k
In the study area, Sherman, Western, and Grant Aven ues operate similarly to minor arterial streets.
As arterials, these roads provide through traffic w ith a route across the project area. In general,
these streets, operating as arterials, focus more o n through traffic mobility then the remaining
streets in the study area.
The remaining streets in the project area, includin g Quade Street, Shippey Street, and Clayton,
Harrison, and Empire Avenues operate most similarly to the collector street classification.
Typically, the corresponding streetscape to this cl assification emphasizes accessibility to
neighboring properties and land uses.
The surrounding street network consists of stop con trolled intersections; there are no stop lights in
the immediate vicinity of the school campus. In gen eral, the arterial streets are free movements,
meaning these streets do not have to stop, at inter sections with the neighborhood streets. When
these arterials intersect, all approaches are gener ally required to stop; the same is generally true
for the intersection of neighborhood streets. The i ntersection controls and road classifications are
presented in Figure 3.
As an urban school district in a neighborhood setti ng, the streetscape generally includes two lanes
of traffic, parking on one or both sides of the roa d, and sidewalks on both sides of the road. There
are no bike lanes or paths near the school. Sidewal ks are notably absent on the south side of
Shippey Street, the south side of Grant Avenue bord ering the school, the east side of Quade Street
north of Shippey Street, and both sides of Clayton Avenue. Additionally, the sidewalk network
bounded by Garfield Street, Shippey Street, and Har rison Avenue has several missing walkway
segments.
Figure 2: Glens Falls School District High
School and Middle School Campuses.

Technical Report

Resource Systems Group, Inc. 3
Insights and Solutions for a Better World

The Glens Falls School District does not provide bu
ssing to a majority of its students. As a walking
school district, bus service is only provided for s tudents with disabilities or for field trips, athletic
events, and other extracurricular activities. The b us staging areas for the high school and middle
school are located within the faculty-only parking lots, as shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4: Bus staging areas and primary entrances t o the high school and middle school.
Figure 3: Street operational characteristics and intersection controls near
the study area campus.

Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Glens Falls School District Traffic Circulation Stu dy

4 August 9, 2012

1 . 1 . 3 T r a v e l O p t i o n s t o S c h o o l
The available modes of travel to and from
the school include walking, bicycling,
students driving alone or with other
students, public transit through the Greater
Glens Falls Transit system, or students being
driven to or from the campus by a parent,
relative, or other adult.
On-street parking is available on all streets
adjacent to the school campus, including the
south side of Sherman Avenue and both
sides of all other streets. East of Quade
Street, parking is allowed only on the north
side of Sherman Avenue. There are pick-up
and drop-off only parking restrictions along
the west side of Quade Street north of Notre
Dame Street. The on-campus parking lots
are for faculty members only. Assigned
parking is available to High School Seniors
south east of the campus at the Calvary
Assembly of God Church parking lot. A
schematic of the parking inventory is
illustrated in Figure 6.
There are two pedestrian paths accessing the main s chool buildings from the north and west sides
of the campus. One path leads from mid-block along Clayton Avenue, through the football fields
north of the bleachers and to the main buildings. T he second path leads from Grant Avenue across
from Austin Street along a new sidewalk, adjacent t o the practice baseball field and batting cage,
and into the Middle School parking lot. These paths are shown in Figure 5.
Bicycle racks were located at the two primary entra nce points. Due to the cold and windy weather
few bikes were expected during observations. Only o ne bicycle, which appeared to have been
damaged and abandoned, was noted in the racks durin g the day of observations in January. Later
campus observations during the spring noticed a hig her utilization rate of bicycles in the racks
during the school day.
Based upon previous school travel surveys conducted at surrounding elementary schools
1, around
55-60% of the students were picked up or dropped of f at the school by their parents.
Approximately 30-35% walked to and from school, wit h the remaining 10% split by carpooling and
biking. As these results represent the travel chara cteristics of two elementary schools, the drive-
alone option was not available and the older studen ts found at the Middle and High Schools are
likely to exhibit greater independence. However, wi th only a small percentage of students eligible to
drive themselves, and the potential for inclement w eather, a similar mode share could be expected.
1 . 1 . 4 P i c k – u p a n d D r o p – o f f P r o c e d u r e s
Currently, the high school day begins at 7:45 and ends at 2:20. The middle school day begins at 8:30
running to 3:00. Arrivals to the school campus were noted to begin prior to 7:30 AM.

1 Abe Wing and Big Cross Elementary School Access Pl ans, 2010
Figure 5: Maintained pedestrian paths
accessing the school campus.

Technical Report

Resource Systems Group, Inc. 5
Insights and Solutions for a Better World

With primary entrances to both the high school and
middle school on Quade Street, many students
are dropped off along either side of Quade Street. As a measure to combat congestion, reduce
through vehicles, and separate high school and midd le school traffic, temporary barriers are set up
along Quade Street north of West Notre Dame Street and south of Shippey Street during the arrival
and departure periods. While this has been effectiv e at managing through traffic, considerable
congestion still exists at the peak arrival and dis missal times. When the closest parking spaces to
the school entrances were occupied, double parked v ehicles were observed allowing passengers to
enter and exit the vehicle. In the dismissal peak p eriod, double parked vehicles were waiting for the
students to exit the school, while other vehicles w ere noted parked in unmarked spaces to wait for
the students to exit the building.

Figure 6: Schematic illustrating on-street parking, assigned student parking, and pick-up and
drop-off designated areas. (Not to scale)

Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Glens Falls School District Traffic Circulation Stu dy

6 August 9, 2012

In addition to vehicle congestion, many students we re dropped off or picked up from the east side
of Quade Street. This location requires that studen ts cross Quade Street, and many were noted to
forego the marked crosswalk locations in favor of c rossing directly in front of the school in the
straightest line possible. This increased the poten tial for students to enter traffic unexpectedly from
between parked vehicles, contributing to additional vehicle-pedestrian conflicts and potentially
unsafe conditions.
1 . 2 P u r p o s e a n d N e e d
This study was initiated to analyze and address the changing school campus population, operating
characteristics, and arrival and departure patterns . Recently, the middle school has taken on all fifth
grade students in the district, increasing the numb er of students attending the campus. As noted
earlier, the arrival and departure times of the hig h school will be aligned with the middle school
beginning with the 2012-2013 school year, potential ly increasing the peak travel period. Lastly, the
overall pick-up and drop-off operational patterns h ave been evaluated with the recent
implementation of temporary traffic barriers.
As described earlier, the purpose of this study inc ludes:

An evaluation of the current access patterns,

Projection of access issues under aligned arrival a nd dismissal times, and

Proposed short and long term improvements to the ci rculation patterns.
The following section outlines the recommended shor t-term and long-term strategies that address
the identified queuing, congestion, and safety issu es identified during the course of the study. These
issues are documented in Sections 3, 4, and 5.
2 . 0 RE C O M M E N D AT I O N S
The proposed recommendations for the project fall u nder two main categories: modifications to the
streetscape environment to improve vehicle flow, re duce congestion, and enhance bicycle and
pedestrian safety, or programmatic strategies to ch ange behavior, encourage a greater percentage
of walking and biking rates, and reduce the number of vehicle trips to the school.
Additional explanation of the impacts and considera tions of these and other improvements is
presented in Section 6.0. More detailed cost estima tes of several of the more complex
recommendations are included in Attachment A.
2 . 1 S h o r t Te r m Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s
The following four recommendations are immediately implementable at a minimal cost. The
primary goal of these recommendations is to provide additional vehicle queuing capacity, improve
safety of the students walking to school and to and from the pick-up and drop-off vehicles, and to
address the anticipated congestion associated with the aligned school days.
2 . 1 . 1 E x p a n d Q u a d e S t r e e t D r o p – O f f A r e a
Approximate Cost: $1000
To provide more waiting areas near the school, it i s recommended that the long-term parking
spaces on the west side of Quade Street between She rman Avenue and West Notre Dame Street are
converted to pick-up and drop-off spaces only. This designation will be consistent with the existing

Technical Report

Resource Systems Group, Inc. 7
Insights and Solutions for a Better World

parking restrictions on the west side of Quade
Street from West Notre Dame Street to Grant
Avenue. The vehicles that currently utilize the
west-side Quade Street parking will be dispersed
to other on-street parking locations. Students may
be encouraged to utilize the assigned parking lot a
t
the Assembly of God Church.
2 . 1 . 2 S h i f t S h e r m a n A v e n u e
P a r k i n g t o N o r t h S i d e o f
S t r e e t
Approximate Cost: $2,250
Similar to the counter-clockwise circulation
strategy, parking and waiting areas on the north
side of Sherman Avenue adjacent to the school will reduce the number of pedestrian crossings from
the south side of the street. Additionally, there a re fewer drives on the north side of Sherman
Avenue, allowing for a greater number of spaces tha n the south side. The drop-off area should allow
for parking during off-peak evening hours, weekends , and for special events. Parking restrictions
should only be placed in this alternate drop-off ar ea during school hours.
Along the entire remaining corridor, parking is cur rently allowed on the south side of Sherman
Avenue. On the studied segment of Sherman Avenue, v ehicles will be forced to weave into and out
of the realigned traveled way. Due to the stop-cont rolled intersection entering this segment,
traveling speeds are anticipated to be low and the transition should be acceptable.
It is recommended that the drop off area maintains a 20-foot no parking restriction adjacent to all
driveways, roadways, and crosswalks. The realigned park on the north side of Sherman Avenue is
illustrated in Figure 8.

Figure 8: Realigned parking on north side of Sherman Avenue.
Extend drop-off
area south to
Sherman Avenue
Quade Street School
Campus
Figure 7: Recommended drop off area
expansion, looking south along Quade Street
near High School entrance.

Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Glens Falls School District Traffic Circulation Stu dy

8 August 9, 2012

2 . 1 . 3 E n c o u r a g e C o u n t e r C l o c k w i s e C i r c u l a t i o n
Approximate Cost: N/A (Include in existing newslett er mailings)
In the district’s communication to parents, it is recommended that the district encourage
counterclockwise circulation for both the high scho ol and middle school drop off areas. This
circulation pattern provides students access to and from vehicles directly from the sidewalk
adjacent to the school, reducing the number of pede strian crossings. Furthermore, vehicles
approaching the campus from West Notre Dame Street and heading south on Quade Street will have
access to the newly expanded drop-off and pick-up a rea; vehicles traveling northbound would not
have safe and legal access to these spaces. Lastly, by encouraging this circulation pattern, the schoo l
district will be able to promote this additional pi ck-up and drop-off area expansion.
2 . 1 . 4 I n c r e a s e T e m p o r a r y B a r r i e r B a l l a s t
Approximate Cost: $100
During our observations, the temporary barriers wer e noted to blow over in strong gusts. If
possible, increasing the ballast in the bottom of t he barriers may improve their stability. The
increased weight of the barriers will decrease thei r ease of implementation, but it is important for
the temporary barriers to remain visible to be effe ctive.
2 . 1 . 5 I n s t a l l A l l – W a y S t o p C o n t r o l s a t S h i p p e y / E m p i r e
Approximate Cost: $800
Given the neighborhood setting, adjacent school cam pus, localized lack of sidewalk infrastructure,
and crash data, all-way stop control is recommended at the Shippey Street / Empire Avenue /
Harrison Avenue intersection. Warning flags are als o recommended on the new sign for the first six
months after installation.
The four short-term recommendations discussed above are illustrated in Figure 9.

Figure 9: Short-term recommendations to enhance saf ety and reduce congestion at the Glens
Falls School District Campus.

Technical Report

Resource Systems Group, Inc. 9
Insights and Solutions for a Better World

2 . 2 L o n g Te r m S t re e t s c a p e E n h a n c e m e n t s
The long term streetscape enhancements are larger p
rojects that attempt to address safety issues
and vehicle congestion. The projects typically repr esent a greater capital expenditure and will likely
require significant planning and engineering design , with potential grant funding opportunities.
2 . 2 . 1 I m p r o v e C i t y S i d e w a l k N e t w o r k
Approximate Cost: $100 – $200 per foot of sidewalk
Several critical segments of sidewalk are missing n ear the school campus. It is recommended that
these sidewalks are constructed to emphasize the Ci ty’s commitment to walking and to improve the
pedestrian environment for students en route to sch ool. The three most critical sidewalk segments
include:
1. South side of Shippey Street from Quade Street to L iberty Avenue ($60,000 – $120,000)
2. South side of Grant Avenue from Clayton Avenue to A ustin Avenue ($40,000 – $80,000)
3. Both sides of Harrison Avenue from Garfield Avenue to Shippey Street ($150,000 –
$300,000)
In addition, specific sidewalk treatments such bulb -outs, accessible sidewalk ramps, and detectable
warning surfaces should be installed where feasible .
2 . 2 . 2 A u t o m a t i c Q u a d e S t r e e t C l o s u r e F e a t u r e s
Approximate Cost: $95,000
The intersections of Quade Street at West Notre Dam e Street and at Shippey Street should be
redeveloped for a more automated and visible street closure. Proposed features may include:

Bulb-outs to reduce crossing distance and street cl osure width,

Automatic gates with flashing lights that close at predetermined times, and

Permanent warning signs indicating the street closu re times.

Figure 10: A view of the recommended automatic gate s at Quade Street and West Notre Dame
Street. Similar treatments are recommended at Quade Street and Shippey Avenue.

Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Glens Falls School District Traffic Circulation Stu dy

10 August 9, 2012

2 . 2 . 3 Q u a d e S t r e e t – S h e r m a n A v e n u e L o o p
Approximate Cost: $550,000
A one way loop, beginning approximately 75 feet nor th of Sherman Avenue, continuing west with
pick-up and drop-off spaces, turning south and inte rsecting with Stevens Street is proposed as the
most feasible off-street parking and waiting area e xpansion. This alignment provides up to 12
vehicle waiting spaces, plus the greatest coordinat ion within the existing street network, reducing
additional vehicle conflicts as much as possible.
Several immediately identifiable issues include:

Sacrifice of the open green space in front of the school for vehicle waiting areas,

Potential for additional congestion within the new loop, specifically if vehicles double park
to wait, or if left turning vehicles cannot exit th e loop,

Loss of on-street parking / drop-off area queue spa ce if parking is shifted to the north side
of Sherman Avenue,

Two new pedestrian – vehicle conflict areas at loop entrance and exit, and

Significant reconstruction of existing campus walkw ays would be required.
This proposed driveway loop is illustrated in Figur e 8.

Figure 11: Potential high school drop-off loop. Req uired sidewalk reconstruction not
illustrated.
2 . 3 P ro g ra m m a t i c S t ra te g i e s
The following strategies are immediately implementa ble and are intended to change travel
behaviors over the long term, ultimately to increas e the number of students who walk, bike, and
ride the bus to school. These programs may reduce c ongestion while also promoting healthier
lifestyles.

Technical Report

Resource Systems Group, Inc. 11
Insights and Solutions for a Better World

2 . 3 . 1 P r o m o t e C o o r d i n a t i o n w i t h T r a n s i t
The School District should coordinate with the loca
l transit provider, Greater Glens Falls Transit
(GGFT) to increase bus ridership as much as feasibl e. Potential collaborative programs may include:

At the beginning of every school year, the district should include a bus route map and time
table for the East-West Commuter Route which access es the school site,

Provide and promote school subsidized passes for th e East-West Commuter Route,

Modify the afternoon East-West Commuter Route so th at the bus picks up on Sherman
Avenue directly adjacent to the school, rather than along the existing route along Grant
Avenue,

Construct a waiting shelter for the East-West Route stop at the High School, and

Provide intuitive internet access, including a rout e map, for information on the East-West
Commuter Route.
2 . 3 . 2 P a r t i c i p a t e i n A c t i v e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n E n c o u r a g e m e n t
P r o g r a m s
The purpose of these programs is to incentivize act ive forms of transportation, including walking,
bicycling. These programs may include:

Safe Routes to School events for the Middle School, including Walk to School Day and Bike
to School Day,

Offer students incentives to walk or
bike to school, potentially with prizes
for highest weekly, monthly, or annual
walking or biking trip totals,

Replace old bike racks with new,
functional, well maintained racks in
prominent locations close to the
school entrances. Consider adding
additional bicycle racks, and

Increase awareness amongst students
and parents on the health, lifestyle and
educational benefits of biking and
walking to school; emphasize the
generally lower safety risks on
walking or biking to school as
compared to driving.
The above recommendations discuss the proposed solu tions to address the identified congestion,
queuing, and safety issues observed through this st udy. The following sections describe the site
reconnaissance, background investigations, safety r esearch, analysis methodology, and alternative
assessments.
3 . 0 TR A F F I C OB S E RVAT I O N S
The traffic observations were conducted throughout the day on January 18, 2012. The weather was
cold, clear, and windy, with temperatures around 25 degrees Fahrenheit. To begin observations,
road tube traffic data collectors were placed on Sh erman Avenue, Quade Street, Grant Avenue, and
Clayton Avenue. The high school and middle school p eak arrival and dismissal periods were
Figure 12: Clean, colorful, and fun new bicycle
racks may attract additional bicycle ridership.
Pictured: the Loop Rack from Muchi East.

Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Glens Falls School District Traffic Circulation Stu dy

12 August 9, 2012

observed from the two intersections nearest the pri mary entrances, with short duration turning
movement counts at adjacent intersections throughou t the day. The resulting traffic volumes,
pedestrian counts, vehicle queues, and general obse rvations were compiled into an overall traffic
model.
3 . 1 O b s e r ve d Tra f f i c Vo l u m e s
The one hour traffic volumes around the school camp us is for the AM and PM school arrival and
dismissal peaks are shown in Figure 13 and Figure 1 4, respectively. Note that Quade Street is closed
to through traffic between West Notre Dame Street a nd Shippey Street during these periods, but
open throughout the rest of the day.

Figure 13: AM peak hour traffic volumes in the stud y area

30 438 0
6 00 26 0
21 0
0
31 70 86 79
36 22 182
39 00
58 155167 141
19 0 26
57 177
39 237 97 19 12
7 49 49
11 8
23
185 118
0
97
3 84
125 351 18 9 13 24 22 50
15 19 20
135 214 165
74 19
101 12 23
244 398
252
95 12
143 256 149 18 44 28
School Campus
MS Parking Lot
HS Parking Lot
HS Entrance
MS Entrance
Grant Ave Ext
Sherman Ave
Cortland StS Western Ave
Western AveAustin StGoodmanSt
Sherman Ave
Grant
Ave
Shippey St
W Notre Dame St
Quade St
Clayton AveWestern Ave

Technical Report

Resource Systems Group, Inc. 13
Insights and Solutions for a Better World

Figure 14: PM peak hour traffic volumes in the stud
y area
The volumes illustrated in Figure 13 and Figure 14 represent the peak hour volumes through the
studied intersections. Operating most nearly as art erial streets, Sherman Avenue, Western Avenue
and Grant Avenue are expected to have a greater pro portion of through vehicles and trips unrelated
to the school traffic, and would be less likely to be affected by the sudden peak in traffic due to
school arrivals and departures. As local collector roads directly serving the school entries, Quade
Street, Shippey Street, and West Notre Dame Street are likely to be more affected by these sudden
traffic peaks.
The peaking behavior caused by the arrival and dism issal of students is best illustrated when
viewing the data in 15-minute periods. Along Quade Street, the southern intersections at West
Notre Dame Street and Sherman Avenue more directly serve the High School, and the northern
intersection at Shippey Street more directly serves the middle school. With High School classes
beginning at 7:45 and ending at 2:20, the Sherman A venue and Notre Dame Street intersections are
expected to experience peak traffic related to the school from 7:30 – 7:45, and 2:15 – 2:30.
Similarly, the peak traffic related to the Middle S chool would be expected in the period prior to the
19 284 0
5 00 12 0
23 0
0
34 67 77 71
40 15 82
19 00
29 7797 85
10 0 12
6 100
19 194 48 29 20
6 41 41
23
12 5
112 69
1
82
0 104
84 237 12 6 9 29 15 38
21 29 27
181 295 245
99 22
68 20 29
165 257
196
64 18
96 173 100 16 48 25
School Campus
MS Parking Lot
HS Parking Lot
HS Entrance
MS Entrance
Grant Ave Ext
Sherman Ave
Cortland StS Western Ave
Western AveAustin StGoodmanSt
Sherman Ave
Grant
Ave
Shippey St
W Notre Dame St
Quade St
Clayton AveWestern Ave

Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Glens Falls School District Traffic Circulation Stu dy

14 August 9, 2012

beginning and after the commencement of classes, or approximately 8:15-8:30 and 3:00 – 3:15.
During the observations conducted January 18, the t raffic data collected at these intersections
followed that pattern.

Figure 15: 15 minute volumes through three studied intersections along Quade Street in the
AM arrival period.
As expected, the observed volume through these inte rsections along Quade Street show a clear,
short duration increase in the traffic from 7:30 – 7:45 for the Notre Dame Street and Sherman
Avenue intersections. The increase in traffic at th e Shippey Street intersection includes the two 15-
minute periods prior to the first class from 8:00 – 8:30.

Figure 16: 15 minute volumes through three studied intersections along Quade Street in the
PM arrival period.
Also as expected, the observed volume through the N otre Dame Street and Sherman Avenue
intersections along Quade Street show a clear, shor t duration increase in the traffic from 2:15 –
2:30, and the Shippey Street intersection peaks at 3:00 – 3:15.
It should be noted that in past mode share surveys, the walking and biking percentage often
increases and the pick-up percentage decreases in t he evening as many parents are still working,

Technical Report

Resource Systems Group, Inc. 15
Insights and Solutions for a Better World

and many students participate in extracurricular ac
tivities. This indicates that the afternoon peak
period is expected to be less pronounced than the m orning peak.
3 . 2 Tu b e C o u n t D a t a C o l l e c t i o n
Tube counters were placed on the streets adjacent to the school to collect traffic data over the
course of the day. The resulting data are shown in Figure 17.

Figure 17: Road volume data from street network adj acent to the school campus from January
18, 2012.
As expected, all neighboring streets display two di stinct peak periods in the morning and afternoon
hours. This AM and PM peaking behavior is common on many streets as residents commute to and
from work. However, the peak is particularly notice able along Quade Street and Grant Avenue,
likely due to traffic related to the schools.
Between 9:00 AM and 2:00 PM, the daytime average v ehicle count on Quade Street and Sherman
Avenue was approximated to be 16 and 103 vehicles p er 15 minutes. These averages are illustrated
by the dashed lines in Figure 17.
3 . 3 O b s e r ve d Ve h i c l e Q u e u e s
As demonstrated by the above figures, the vehicle t ravel patterns to and from the school are
characterized by sharp, short duration increases in traffic for drivers to pick up or drop off
students. In both the morning drop-off and afternoo n pick-up periods vehicle queues were
observed. When no street parking space was availab le, drivers were noted to momentarily double-
park and allow the student to enter or exit the veh icle. Depending on the amount of time used in
this process, a queue would often form behind the o bstructing vehicle. The maximum observed
queue was approximately five vehicles.
In addition to blocking traffic, the double parking created a rushed atmosphere in which students
hurried to or from the vehicles. In several instanc es, students were observed to cross the roadway
at unexpected locations, entering traffic from with in the vehicle queues.

Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Glens Falls School District Traffic Circulation Stu dy

16 August 9, 2012

Fortunately, as Quade Street is a low volume neighb orhood street, almost all traffic observed near
the school during the arrival and dismissal periods was associated with the school. In this case,
most drivers were aware of the potential for pedest rians, were prepared for expected queues, and
generally operated appropriately.
3 . 4 Ve h i c l e a n d Pe d e s t r i a n O b s e r va t i o n S u m m a r y
The following summarizes the general traffic and tr avel characteristics observed on January 18,
2012:

The two primary modes to and from the school were w alking and being driven / dropped
off and picked up. Some students drove themselves a nd with others.

Considerable traffic related to the dropping-off an d picking-up of students can be expected
30 minutes prior to and following the beginning and ending of the school day, respectively.

Many students cross Quade Street in the most direct path between their destination and the
school entrance.

Queue lengths were reasonable, and it appeared that most drivers understood that a
significant number of students and pedestrians woul d be present.

The temporary barriers used to close off Quade Stre ets were blown over in strong gusts of
wind.
4 . 0 CR A S H AN A LY S I S
All traffic collisions reported to the Glens Falls Police Department were compiled within the study
area. From 2008 to 2011, there were 35 collisions r esulting in two injuries and zero fatalities. There
were no reported collisions involving pedestrians. There was one collision involving a bicyclist
resulting in injury. All reported collisions are il lustrated in Figure 18.
The collision involving the bicyclist occurred outs ide the school peak hours and is unlikely to be
related to school transportation. In addition, this collision occurred at Morton Street and Sherman
Avenue, generally outside the project area. It is i llustrated in the far southeast corner of Figure 18 .

Technical Report

Resource Systems Group, Inc. 17
Insights and Solutions for a Better World

Figure 18: Reported vehicle collisions near the pro
ject areas from 2008 to 2011.
From Figure 18, several areas appear to have a high number of collisions, including:

The Western Avenue / Sherman Avenue intersection,

The Sherman Avenue / Quade Street intersection,

The Quade Street / Notre Dame Street intersection,

The Shippey Street / Empire Avenue / Harrison Avenu e intersection

The Sherman Avenue corridor, and

The Quade Street corridor.
4 . 1 We s te r n Ave n u e / S h e r m a n Ave n u e I n t e r s e c t i o n
There were seven collisions at this intersection. S ince the intersection is all-way stop controlled, the
predominant crash type would be expected to be rear end collisions common at locations where
vehicles are often changing speed. However, six of the seven collisions were reported as right angle
crashes, indicating that the vehicle did not stop a nd yield at the intersection. Sight distance is not
limited at this location. Advance warning signs or enhanced visibility treatments at the stop sign,
such as a retroreflective post, may reduce the numb er of collisions at this intersection. Two of the
seven collisions took place during the school peak hour, and none of these crashes resulted in
injury.
Crash
Investigation Area

Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Glens Falls School District Traffic Circulation Stu dy

18 August 9, 2012

4 . 2 S h e r m a n Ave n u e / Q u a d e S t r e e t I n te r s e c t i o n
Five collisions were reported at this intersection, one of which took place during the peak hour of
school traffic. No injuries resulted from the colli sions. Four of the five collisions were right angle
collisions from Cortland Avenue or Quade Street. Th is may indicate that the offset geometry of the
intersection may be adding to confusion.
Although not recommended in this study, the offset entrances to the intersection and the
availability of public right of way to the northwes t may indicate that this may be an acceptable
location for future construction of a roundabout. D ue to the operating characteristics of
roundabouts, right-angle collisions would likely be reduced significantly. If this collision scenario
continues, additional study may be required to dete rmine if a roundabout would improve the safety
and operation of this intersection.
4 . 3 Q u a d e S t re e t / We s t N o t r e D a m e S t r e e t I n t e r s e c t i o n
Four collisions were reported at this intersection, three of which occurred during the school peak
hour with one injury resulting. Two of the four col lisions appeared to be between a vehicle
performing a parallel parking maneuver and the adja cent parked vehicles. A third collision,
resulting in an injury, was reported to have been l eaving a parked position with a contributing
factor listed as driver inexperience. The fourth co llision took place outside of the normal school day .
The collisions were recorded before May of 2010. Th e current practice of closing Quade Street
between West Notre Dame Street and Shippey Street w ill likely have an impact on collision rates
into the future.
4 . 4 S h i p p ey S t re e t / E m p i re Ave n u e / H a r r i s o n Ave n u e
I n t e r s e c t i o n
Five collisions were recorded at this intersection, two of which occurred during the school peak
hour, none of which resulted in injury. Four of the five causes of the crashes are reported as failure
to yield right of way. At this intersection, the Em pire and Harrison Avenue approaches are stop
controlled, while the Shippey Street approaches are free. Providing stop control on all approaches
will likely correct this collision type.
In addition, an all-way stop controlled intersectio n is warranted based on MUTCD criteria
2B.07.05B:
“The need to control vehicle/pedestrian conflicts n ear locations that generate high pedestrian
volumes;”
And criteria 2B.07.05D: “An intersection of two residential neighborhood co llector (through) streets of similar design and
operating characteristics where multi-way stop cont rol would improve traffic operational
characteristics of the intersection.”
4 . 5 S h e r m a n Ave n u e C o r r i d o r
Outside of the Quade Street and Western Avenue inte rsection collisions, there were seven collisions
along this length of street. Two of these seven occ urred during the school peak hours and were
recorded as vehicles performing parallel parking ma neuvers. The remaining five do not appear to
be related to school traffic.

Technical Report

Resource Systems Group, Inc. 19
Insights and Solutions for a Better World

4 . 6 Q u a d e S t r e e t C o r r i d o r
Outside of the Quade Street intersections with Sher
man Avenue and West Notre Dame Street, there
were six collisions along the corridor, five of whi ch occurred during the school peak hour. Of these
five, all were related to vehicle overtaking maneuv ers, indicating that a vehicle was blocking the
traveled way. This is potentially due to double par ked vehicles waiting for children to enter or exit.
These types of collisions may be corrected if addit ional convenient queue space is available.
5 . 0 EF F E C T O F AL I G N E D SC H O O L DAY S
The current staggered high school and middle school arrival and departure times have the effect of
distributing the school related traffic impact over two distinct peaks, separated by 45 minutes. By
aligning the school days, these peaks will effectiv ely be combined into one, as students from both
schools arrive and depart from at the same time.
5 . 1 A p p ro x i m a t i n g t h e E x i s t i n g D e m a n d
During the 2012-2013 school year, the high school a rrival and departure times will be aligned with
the middle school. In effect, the days for both sch ools will begin at 8:30 AM and end at 3:00 PM. To
determine the anticipated change in traffic due to this alignment, the vehicle trips associated with
the high school arrival patterns need to be isolate d, and combined with the middle school traffic.
Several key assumptions to assist in this analysis follow:

Families with students in both the high school and middle school are assumed to not
currently be making two separate drop-off and pick- up trips. This will result in a
conservative traffic estimate, as the aligned times will allow for one of these trips to be
removed.

The mode share of high school students will be appr oximated at:
50% – Driven By Parents / Other
25% – Walk / Bike / Bus
25% – Drive alone or with student-aged family / fri ends
This mode share is important. The 25% of high schoo l students (approximately 190 students) that
walk, bike, or take the bus to school do not signif icantly contribute to vehicle congestion. Another
25% of the high school students, again approximatel y 190 students, park off site or along the side
streets, resulting in two vehicle trips over the co urse of the day: to the school in the morning, and
away from the school in the afternoon. The remainin g 50% of the high school population, or
approximately 385 students, are being driven by a p arent or other person. These students are
responsible for four trips each, to and from the sc hool in the morning and again in the afternoon.

All vehicles will be assumed to be carrying two stu dents. This assumption, based on the
mode share above, indicates that approximately 195 vehicles will be dropping off and
picking up high school students, and 95 vehicles wi ll be driven and parked near the school.
This results in approximately 290 vehicles related to the high school student travel patterns
expected to access the school campus.

Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Glens Falls School District Traffic Circulation Stu dy

20 August 9, 2012

5 . 2 Ty p i c a l G l e n s Fa l l s S t r e e t Tra f f i c C h a ra c te r i s t i c s
To approximate the traffic demand related to the school, the observed traffic on the adjacent street
network was compared to similar streets in Glens Fa lls. A previous study
2 produced the tube count
data illustrated in Figure 19 on Lincoln Avenue, Ho ricon Avenue, and Coolidge Avenue in Glens
Falls. Operating similarly to a combination of arte rial streets (Horicon Avenue) and local collector
streets (Coolidge Avenue and Lincoln Avenue), these streets are representative of the mixture of
roadway classifications found adjacent to the schoo l campus.

Figure 19: Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study wee kday traffic calming data, July 28 – August
3, 2011.
As shown above, the daytime average volume of vehic les for Lincoln, Horicon, and Coolidge
Avenues is 16, 29, and 18 vehicles per 15 minutes r espectively. Relating these averages to the
observed morning and afternoon maximums, the peak 1 5-minute volume to average 15-minute
volume ratio is shown in the table below.

Other similar streets within the city were also com pared to the traffic volumes measured adjacent
to the school. While the general characteristic sha pe is similar, the data analyzed were only
available in one-hour increments. As this study is specifically interested in short-duration peaks
caused by the school arrival and dismissal periods, the broad, one-hour increment data is too blunt
to be applied to this study.
This one-hour increment data is presented in Figure 20 .

2 Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study, October 2011 . Traffic data taken from 7/28/11 to 8/3/11, excluding the weekend dates of 7/30/11 and
7/31/11.
AM Peak*PM Peak*
Lincoln Avenue
16 16 20 1.00 1.25
Horicon Avenue29 41 37 1.41 1.28
Coolidge Avenue18 23 27 1.28 1.50
*Vehi cl es per 15 mi nutes
Daytime
Average*
AM Peak :
Average Ratio
PM Peak :
Average Ratio

Technical Report

Resource Systems Group, Inc. 21
Insights and Solutions for a Better World

Figure 20: One-hour incremental data from other nea
rby Glens Falls City streets.
5 . 3 I s o l a t i n g H i g h S c h o o l Re l a te d Tra f f i c
Using the peak to average ratio calculated on similar streets, we can approximate the volumes on
Sherman Avenue and Quade Street that are assumed to be independent of the school campus. Since
Sherman and Horicon Avenues behave as arterial stre ets, the peak : average ratios obtained from
Horicon Avenue are the most appropriate comparison analytic for Sherman Avenue. Similarly, the
ratios from Lincoln and Coolidge Avenues, both oper ating similar to local collector streets, were
averaged to be used in approximating the vehicle vo lumes along Quade Street. These approximated
volumes are shown in the table on the following pag e.

These approximate “normal” peaks shown in the table above are plotted with the observed volumes
along Quade Street and Sherman Avenue. The effect o f the school campus is approximated by the
difference in this “normal” peak and the observed p eak, illustrated by the shaded area shown below
in Figure 21.
Approx. Approx.
AM Peak* PM Peak*
Quade Street
1.14 1.38 16 18 22
Sherman Avenue1.41 1.28 103 146 131
*Vehi cl es per 15 mi nutes
Daytime
Average*
AM Peak :
Average Ratio
PM Peak :
Average Ratio

Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Glens Falls School District Traffic Circulation Stu dy

22 August 9, 2012

Figure 21: Approximate volume of the traffic relate d to the school campus along Quade Street
and Sherman Avenue.
The shaded regions above illustrate approximately 6 70 vehicles traveling to the school campus on
an average day.
To approximate the traffic shift that will likely o ccur when the school days are aligned, the
difference in the observed vehicles and the indepen dent vehicles arriving from 7:15 – 7:45 and
from 2:00 – 2:30 should be shifted and added to the observed vehicles from 8:00 – 8:30 and 2:45 –
3:15. This shift is illustrated below in Figure 22.

Figure 22: Approximate expected shift in volumes al ong Quade Street and Sherman Avenue
under aligned school days.

Technical Report

Resource Systems Group, Inc. 23
Insights and Solutions for a Better World

The shaded regions illustrated above from 7:15 to 7
:45 and 2:00 – 2:30 represent approximately
300 vehicles traveling to and from the school campu s along Quade Street and Sherman Avenue
every day. This is similar to the approximate deman d calculated by the assumptions outlined in
Section 5.1.
The approximate traffic resulting from the alignmen t of the Middle School and High School day
along Quade Street and Sherman Avenue is illustrate d on Figure 23.

Figure 23: Approximate anticipated volumes along Qu ade Street and Sherman Avenue under
aligned school days.
5 . 4 E f f e c t o f A l i g n e d S c h o o l D ays
The overall effect of aligning the High School and Middle School days is best illustrated in Figure 23 .
The total number of vehicles accessing the school c ampus is assumed to remain the same, however
the time period in which these vehicles arrive and depart will be shortened. The peak periods
shown above have been condensed from 7:15 AM – 8:30 AM and 2:15 – 3:15 PM to 7:45 – 8:15 AM
and 2:45 – 3:15 PM. This results in a more pronounc ed, sharper morning and afternoon peak traffic
volume. The changes in these peak 15-minute volumes are illustrated in the table below.

AM / PM 15- Minute Vehicle Peak: Separate AM / PM 15-
Minute Vehicle Peak: Aligned AM / PM% Change
Sherman Avenue 209 / 159 218 / 201 +4.8% / +26.4%
Quade Street 103 / 82 132 / 100 +28.2% / +21.6%

The effect of the aligned school days is not expect
ed to significantly change the maximum hourly
volume of vehicles through the street network, but it is anticipated to create a spike in the peak 15-
minute volume. The relationship between the peak 15 -minute period within the peak hour of traffic
is represented by the Peak Hour Factor (PHF). The P HF is a measure of the fluctuation of traffic

Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Glens Falls School District Traffic Circulation Stu dy

24 August 9, 2012

demand within the peak hour. A PHF equal to 1.0 ind icates that there is no fluctuation in the 15
minute intervals within the peak hour. As the PHF d ecreases, the variation between the peak 15
minute interval and the average 15 minute interval becomes greater.

Separate School Days Aligned School Days
Peak Hour
Volume (veh) Peak 15
Minute
Volume (veh)

Peak Hour Factor (PHF) Peak Hour
Volume (veh) Peak 15
Minute
Volume (veh)

Peak Hour
Factor (PHF)
AM
Sherman Avenue

647 208 0.78 667 219 0.76
Quade
Street

303 103 0.74 310 132 0.59
PM
Sherman
Avenue

590 159 0.93 606 201 0.75
Quade
Street

211 82 0.64 229 100 0.58
PHF = Peak Hour Volume / (4 x Peak 15-Minute Volume )
As expected, the peak hour factor dropped along bot h Quade Street and Sherman Avenue under the
aligned school times, most notably along Quade Stre et in the morning from 0.74 to 0.59, a -20%
change, and Sherman Avenue in the afternoon from 0. 93 to 0.75, a change of -19%.
In practical terms, the decrease in the PHF indicat es that about the same number of vehicles will be
accessing the school campus in a shorter window of time, likely leading to increased congestion.
From a visual perspective, the peak represented by (1) in Figure 24 is shifted about 45 minutes
later in the day to peak (2). There is no change in the size from (1) – (2) because the middle school
has little effect on the traffic along Sherman Stre et in the morning. However, in the evening, the hig h
school peak (3) compounds with the middle school pe ak to create a significantly larger 15-minute
traffic demand at 3:00 PM represented by peak (4). This is also represented by the change in the
PHF discussed above.

Technical Report

Resource Systems Group, Inc. 25
Insights and Solutions for a Better World

Figure 24: Approximate anticipated volumes along Qu
ade Street and Sherman Avenue under
aligned school days, with specific traffic peaks an notated.
Similarly, the high school peak compounds the middl e school peak on Quade Street in the morning
(5) but appears to have a relatively minor effect i n the afternoon (6). This is also demonstrated in
the change of the PHF. Overall, the data suggest th at congestion will be worsened during the arrival
and dismissal periods with the aligned school times , particularly during the peak 15 minutes in the
morning drop off period along Quade Street and the afternoon pick up period along Sherman
Avenue.
5 . 5 S h e r m a n Ave n u e & Q u a d e S t r e e t I n te r s e c t i o n A n a lys i s
The intersection at Sherman Avenue, Quade Street, and Cortland Street was analyzed using traffic
simulation software under the existing separate sch ool days. The existing traffic operation
characteristics were then compared to the anticipat ed conditions under aligned school days. The
analytical software used was Synchro Version 7. The primary measure of traffic operation is Level-
of-service (LOS), which is a qualitative measure de scribing the operating conditions as perceived by
motorists driving in a traffic stream. LOS is estim ated using the procedures outlined in the 2000
Highway Capacity Manual.
The 2000 Highway Capacity Manual defines six qualit ative grades to describe the level of service at
an intersection. Level-of-Service is based on the a verage control delay per vehicle. Table 1 shows
the various LOS grades and descriptions for signali zed and unsignalized intersections.

Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Glens Falls School District Traffic Circulation Stu dy

26 August 9, 2012

Table 1: Level-of-Service Criteria for Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections
Unsignalized Signalized
LOS Characteristics Total Delay (sec) Total Delay ( sec)
A Little or no delay ≤ 10.0 ≤ 10.0
B Short delays 10.1-15.0 10.1-20.0
C Average delays 15.1-25.0 20.1-35.0
D Long delays 25.1-35.0 35.1-55.0
E Very long delays 35.1-50.0 55.1-80.0
F Extreme delays > 50.0 > 80.0
For stop-controlled intersections such as the Sherman Avenue / Quade Street intersection, the LOS
provides a tool to compare the existing traffic ope rations to future, aligned school day traffic
operations. Typically, LOS C or above is considered acceptable.
As discussed earlier, the only change in the antici pated traffic characteristics will be the
concentration of vehicles into a shorter 15-minute period. This is represented by the peak hour
factor. The level-of-service results for the Sherma n Avenue / Quade Street intersection is presented
in the table below.

Since the morning peak hour factor at this intersection was relatively stable, the AM peak period
level-of-service essentially remained unchanged. In the afternoon, the peak hour factor dropped
from 0.93 to 0.75 and the resulting intersection de lay is increased as expected. In all aligned cases
the delay for each specific entrance into the inter section, as well as the delay for overall
intersection, is below 15 seconds, with a resulting acceptable LOS B.
5 . 6 E f f e c t o n O b s e r ve d Ve h i c l e Q u e u i n g
During the observation period, vehicle queuing was cited as a significant issue adding to congestion
along Quade Street. With the aligned school days, q ueuing is expected to increase as more vehicles
arrive in the condensed 15-minute peak. This partic ular queuing is difficult to anticipate as it is
based on driver behavior (i.e. double parking, slow ly creeping, etc.) and student behavior (time
taken to enter and exit vehicle, walking speed, etc .). As queuing has been identified as an issue
under the existing drop-off and pick-up patterns, i t is evident that the short-term parking supply
AM
Sherman Ave/Quade
St/Cortland StLOS Delay (s) LOS Delay (s)
OverallB12B12
EB, Sherman Ave B 13 B 14
WB, Sherman Ave B 11 B 11 NB, Cortland St A 10 B 10SB, Quade St B 10 B 10 PM
Sherman Ave/Quade
St/Cortland StLOS Delay (s) LOS Delay (s)
OverallB10B13
EB, Sherman Ave B 10 B 13
WB, Sherman Ave B 11 B 14 NB, Cortland St A 9 B 10
SB, Quade St A 9 B 10 Separate School Days
Separate School Days
Aligned School Days
Aligned School Days

Technical Report

Resource Systems Group, Inc. 27
Insights and Solutions for a Better World

near the school has been exhausted. With aligned sc
hool days, the additional vehicles will add
further demand to this limited supply and queuing w ill likely increase substantially.
5 . 7 S u m m a r y o f E f f e c t s o f A l i g n e d S c h o o l D ays
The anticipated effects of shifting the start and end times of the High School to align with the Middl e
School are summarized below:

No additional increase in total traffic is anticipa ted with the school alignment; a slight
decline is possible as some parents may combine two trips into one.

Traffic will be condensed primarily into one 30-min ute period before school begins and as
school ends, resulting in an increase in the peak 1 5-minute traffic, but no significant change
in the peak hour traffic.

The Sherman Avenue / Quade Street / Cortland Street intersection will likely continue to
operate acceptably under the proposed aligned schoo l day.

Queuing along Quade Street is anticipated to increa se substantially as vehicles may double
park to drop students off or allow students to ente r the vehicle.
6 . 0 CO N G E S T I O N MI T I G AT I O N ST R AT E G I E S
The primary issues that have arisen out of this study are summarized below:

A high percentage of students in the school distric t are dropped-off and picked-up at both
schools.

Many of these pick-ups and drop-offs occur along Qu ade Street, and the aligned school days
will likely condense the current hour of minor cong estion into 30 minutes of greater
congestion.

Several complaints arose about parents waiting in t he Middle School Parking Lot, although
it is clearly marked for “Authorized Vehicles Only” .

The existing temporary barriers used to block of Qu ade Street between West Notre Dame
Street and Shippey Street were noticed to be easily blown over.
The following sections discuss the potential strate gies that may be employed to address these
issues.
6 . 1 D e ve l o p A l t e r n a te O n – S t r e e t P i c k – U p a n d D r o p – O f f
L o c a t i o n s
The most effective congestion mitigation and safety enhancement strategy would involve
increasing the number of students that walk and bik e to school. However, it is unrealistic to expect
considerable change in school commuting behavior be fore the next school year when school days
will be aligned. Until more active modes of transpo rtation are the dominant transportation choice,
additional on-street waiting areas may alleviate so me queuing and congestion in the short term.
The following potential alternatives may be employe d to distribute traffic and provide additional
queue storage.

Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Glens Falls School District Traffic Circulation Stu dy

28 August 9, 2012

6 . 1 . 1 E n c o u r a g e t h e U s e o f C l a y t o n A v e n u e a n d G r a n t A v e n u e
E n t r a n c e P o i n t s
The pedestrian access points at Grant Avenue to the north and Clayton Avenue to the west were
underutilized. Both streets had ample on-street par king and maintained paths leading to school
entrance points. However, neither street had a cove red waiting area or sidewalks along the street,
amenities that would likely be needed for the area to be fully utilized. Additionally, the path to
Clayton Avenue crosses athletic fields, is not a pa ved or concrete surface and may be difficult to
maintain in the winter, and may not be suitable for pedestrian traffic at all times.
This alternative may be popular with parents as stu dents will be directly dropped off to and picked
up from the school campus, yet these parents will n ot have to navigate the more congested Quade
Street and Sherman Avenue.
6 . 1 . 2 R e s t r i c t P a r k i n g a l o n g Q u a d e S t r e e t S o u t h o f W e s t N o t r e
D a m e S t r e e t
The majority of parking along Quade Street is being used throughout the day by students.
Restricting parking along one or both sides of Quad e Street during the primary start and end times
for picking-up and dropping-off only will provide a great deal additional queue storage. The
displaced students will likely park on nearby neigh borhood streets, and many residents may resist
this daily influx of vehicles.
6 . 1 . 3 M o v e t h e p a r k i n g a i s l e a l o n g S h e r m a n A v e n u e
The existing parking aisle on the south side of She rman Avenue does not directly serve the High
School. By moving the parking aisle to the north si de of Sherman Avenue, westbound vehicles may
be able to drop off and pick up students directly t o the campus, eliminating the need for students to
have to cross Sherman Avenue. Additionally, the sou th side of Sherman Avenue has 11 driveways
and two roads intersecting the street between Clayt on Avenue and Cortland Street. Each roadway
and driveway breaks up the parking aisle, reduces t he number of parking spaces, and limits sight
distance. On the north side of Sherman Avenue, ther e are only three curbs to the school campus in
the same block: two for the high school parking lot and one for access to the athletic fields. Placing
the parking aisle on the north side of the street w ould maximize both pedestrian safety and queue
capacity.
The transition along Sherman Avenue from parking on the south side to parking on the north side
of would need to be thoroughly reviewed and coordin ated with neighboring property owners. Signs
would need to be placed and it may be appropriate t o coordinate the change in parking with a
paving project in order to place centerline and par king aisle pavement markings to clearly delineate
the change in traffic pattern. It would be advisabl e to continue the north side parking west to the
next four-way stop intersection at Western Avenue.
Lastly, this adjustment in parking may be combined with hardscape treatments such as bulb-outs to
shorten crossing distances and deflect vehicles int o the newly realigned driving lane. Bulb-outs may
also be helpful at the midblock crosswalks between Larose Street and Cortland Street. At all school
driveways parking should be restricted within 20-fe et to provide for adequate sight distances.
6 . 1 . 4 E n c o u r a g e c o u n t e r – c l o c k w i s e c i r c u l a t i o n
Parents should be educated to encourage counter clo ckwise circulation along West Notre Dame
Street – Quade Street – Sherman Avenue and Grant Av enue – Quade Street – Shippey Street. This

Technical Report

Resource Systems Group, Inc. 29
Insights and Solutions for a Better World

counter clockwise circulation will allow students t
o directly access the school campus to and from
the vehicles without having to cross the street, el iminating many jaywalking instances.
6 . 2 Re s t r i c t A c c e s s to S c h o o l Pa r k i n g L o t s
Congestion within the existing school parking lots was cited as a concern. Currently, the school
parking lot entrance is signed to restrict unauthor ized vehicles. Beyond educating parents that the
lot is not for picking-up or dropping-off students, additional measures may be warranted such as
automatic gates further restricting access to the l ot, or potential officer enforcement of restrictions.
6 . 3 E n h a n c e d Te m p o ra r y S t r e e t C l o s u re B a r r i e r s
The temporary street closure barriers were effectiv e at keeping most
traffic from driving through the closed portion of Quade Street
between Shippey Street and West Notre Dame Street. This closure is
valuable in the reduction of through traffic and it s ability to create a
slower vehicle environment, allowing for enhanced p edestrian
circulation. Since these effects are only desired d uring the arrival and
dismissal periods, it is imperative that the barrie rs be temporary and
portable. The current temporary barriers, marketed as the Multi-
Gate Extendable Barricade and pictured at left set up on Quade
Street, suit this application.

According to the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices
(MUTCD), the temporary closure of the roadway for
approximately one hour would fall into a Category D , or short
duration, temporary traffic control situation (Sect ion 6G.02).
Under these circumstances, “simplified control proc edures may
be warranted”. A typical duration road closure invo lves advance
warning signs and type 3 barricades. However, given the short
duration of the closure, the amount of time to set up and remove
these control devices would be too difficult to reg ularly
implement. Additionally, the slow-speed neighborhoo d
environment, coupled with low traffic volumes and g eneral
driver familiarity with the devices allows drivers greater time to process the non-traditional traffic
control setup. The pedestrian benefits of the road closure outweigh the potential risks associated
with this method of street closure.
While the current barriers are acceptable for short term closures on these low volume streets, the
barriers were noted to be light and unstable. The b arriers were observed to be easily blown onto
the ground. The Multi-Gate Extendable Barricade pro duct specification indicates that these barriers
may be stabilized with up to 20 pounds of sand or w ater ballast in the base of the devices, and it is
recommended that this feature is utilized.
Based on the observed operation of Quade Street und er aligned school days and road closure
between West Notre Dame and Shippey Streets, more p ermanent, automated, and standard road
closure devices should be used. These devices may i nclude changeable LED “DO NOT ENTER” signs,
railroad-style gates, and flashing red lights that are activated during the arrival and dismissal
periods. Additionally, regulatory road signs may ne ed to be installed indicating the closure periods.
A more formal evaluation of the effectiveness of th e current practices under the aligned school days
is advised prior to the installation of these devic es.

Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Glens Falls School District Traffic Circulation Stu dy

30 August 9, 2012

6 . 4 C o n s t r u c t N e w S i t e C i r c u l a t i o n Pa t te r n s
Four new site circulation patterns have been prelim inarily developed to review the potential
impacts to circulation. These alternatives are illu strated as attachments to this memorandum.
These hardscape enhancements would generally repres ent large investments. Illustrations of the
alternatives, including cost estimates and an alter natives evaluation chart, are presented in
Attachment B.
6 . 4 . 1 A l t e r n a t i v e 1 : S h e r m a n A v e n u e H i g h S c h o o l L o o p
The Sherman Avenue loop would build a new one-way d rop off roadway, intersecting with Stevens
Street. The loop may provide queue storage for 10 v ehicles. Additional congestion issues may arise
as eastbound Sherman Avenue vehicles queue to turn left, not allowing vehicles from the loop to
exit, which may create gridlock conditions as the l oop fills up. The entrance to the loop is close to
the Quade Street / Cortland Street intersection.
6 . 4 . 2 A l t e r n a t i v e 2 : Q u a d e S t r e e t t o S h e r m a n A v e n u e D r o p – O f f
The Quade to Sherman Drop-Off is similar to Alternative 1 but avoids some of the potential gridlock
conditions. The drop off drive may provide queue st orage for 12 vehicles. The entrance to the drop-
off drive is notably close to the Quade Street / Sh erman Avenue intersection.
6 . 4 . 3 A l t e r n a t i v e 3 : G r a n t A v e n u e A c c e s s R o a d
The Grant Avenue Access Road would create a one-way roadway from the Austin Street / Grant
Avenue intersection into the rear of the Middle Sch ool parking lot. The roadway would bisect some
athletic fields and provide queue storage for 5 veh icles. This access road would provide additional
vehicle access to the currently access restricted a nd congested Middle School Parking Lot.
6 . 4 . 4 A l t e r n a t i v e 4 : Q u a d e S t r e e t M i d d l e S c h o o l L o o p
The Quade Street Loop would create a one-way loop s outh of the Middle School entrance north of
Shippey Street. The southern exit from the loop wou ld intersect offset from Shippey Street. The
loop may potentially provide queue storage for 6 ve hicles.
6 . 5 I n c re a s e t h e Pe rc e n t a g e o f S t u d e n t s t h a t Wa l k / B i k e
/ B u s to S c h o o l
Increasing the number of students that utilize acti ve transportation as their primary transportation
method to school will decrease the number of vehicl es accessing the campus, thereby reducing
congestion and queuing. As described by the Centers for Disease Control, the National Center for
Safe Routes to School, and other advocacy groups ci te additional benefits to active commutes to
school, including:

Increased levels of physical activity,

Improved alertness,

Heightened self-image and independence,

Contribution to healthy social and emotional develo pment, and

Increased likelihood of future active lifestyles.
To increase the mode share of active transportation , the following actions are recommended:

Technical Report

Resource Systems Group, Inc. 31
Insights and Solutions for a Better World

Walk / Bike Bus
Educate parents on the health, lifestyle and
educational benefits of biking and walking to
school; encourage students to walk or bike to
school on their own. Increase awareness of bus route and schedule,
and encourage greater bus ridership in
district newsletter.
Educate parents on reality of safety risks on
walking or biking to school, and compare to
the generally higher risk of driving.
Subsidize free or reduced student boarding
passes to East-West Commuter Route serving
the School.
Participate and register for Safe Routes to
School events, such as the annual Walk to
School Day and Bike to School Day (available
only for middle school). Construct / install a shelter for students to
wait protected from the elements.
Offer students incentives to walk or bike to
school, potentially with prizes for highest
annual weekly or monthly walking or biking
trip totals. Offer students incentives to ride the bus,
potentially with prizes for highest annual
weekly, monthly, or annual ridership
Replace old bike racks with new, functional,
well maintained racks in prominent locations
close to the school entrances.

Work with the City and A/GFTC to prioritize,
seek funding for, and construct missing
sidewalk segments, particularly the missing
curb ramps at new crossing locations and the
missing sections to the east of campus.
7 . 0 IM P L E M E N TAT I O N MAT R I X
The following implementation task schedule for the
recommended enhancements described in
Section 2.0 follows below:
Short Term Improvements:
Recommendation Description and Responsible Party (R P) Approximate Cost
Expand Quade Street Drop Off
Area Striping and signs between Sherman
Avenue and West Notre Dame Street
RP: Coordination between City of Glens
Falls DPW, School District $1,000
Shift Sherman Avenue Parking to
North Side of Street
New striping and signs, removing old
signs
RP: DPW, School District $2,250
Encourage Counter Clockwise
Circulation
Temporary signs and mailers
RP: School District N/A

Adirondack / Glens Falls Transportation Council
Glens Falls School District Traffic Circulation Stu dy

32 August 9, 2012

Recommendation Description and Responsible Party (R P) Approximate Cost
Increase Temporary Barrier
Ballast Sand bags placed in barrier ballast
containers
RP: School District $100
Install All-Way Stop Control at
Shippey Street and Empire Avenue
Installation of signs and striping, plus
temporary warning flags
RP: DPW, Glens Falls Police
Department (GFPD) $800

Long Term Improvements:
Recommendation Description and Responsible Party (R
P) Approximate Cost
Improve City Sidewalk
Network Sidewalk and curb construction
RP: School District, DPW, A/GFTC $100 – $200 per
foot of sidewalk
Automatic Quade Street
Closure Features
New gates, signs, curbing, bulb-outs, and
crosswalks
RP: School District, DPW $95,000
Quade Street to Sherman
Avenue Loop Waiting Area
New curb, asphalt, sidewalk and drive
entrances
RP: School District, DPW $550,000

Programmatic Improvements:
Recommendation Description and Responsible Party (R
P) Approximate Cost
Promote Coordination with
Transit Publish transit maps and timetables with
school flyers; re-route PM East-West
Corridor route; waiting shelter at school on
Sherman Avenue; potential fare subsidies
RP: School District; GGFT; A/GFTC annual expenses to
promote activities
Participate in Active
Transportation Encouragement
Programs
Participate in national and statewide
events when possible; incentivize and
promote highest rider- / walker-ship
RP: School District; A/GFTC annual expenses to
promote activities

PROJECT:
CALCULATED BY:DATE:08/09/12
CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE FOR RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Short Term Improvements
Expand Quade Street Drop-Off AreaItem UnitQuantity
Unit Price Item Price
4″ YELLOW STRIPING LF 835 0.25 208.75 $
STREET CLEANING LS 1 250 250.00 $
TRAFFIC SIGNS EA 3 50 150.00 $
SIGN POSTS EA 3 100 300.00 $
Subtotal 908.75 $
Contingency (10%)90.88$ TOTAL 999.63$
Shift Sherman Avenue Parking to North Item UnitQuantity
Unit Price Item Price
4″ WHITE STRIPING LF 440 0.25 110.00 $
STREET CLEANING LS 1 250 250.00 $
REMOVING SIGNS & POSTS EA 5 35 175.00 $
TRAFFIC SIGNS EA 10 50 500.00 $
SIGN POSTS EA 10 100 1,000.00 $
Subtotal 2,035.00 $
Contingency (10%)203.50$ TOTAL 2,238.50$
Stop Signs at Shippey and Empire Item UnitQuantity
Unit Price Item Price
24″ STOP BAR LF 24 5 120.00 $
“STOP” MARKING EA 2 100 200.00 $
TRAFFIC SIGNS EA 2 100 200.00 $
SIGN POSTS EA 2 100 200.00 $
Subtotal 720.00 $
Contingency (10%)72.00$ TOTAL 792.00$
Long Term Improvements
Automatic Quade Street Closure FeaturesItem UnitQuantity
Unit Price Item Price
SIDEWALK SF 1200 30 $36,000.00
CURB LF 350 35 $12,250.00
CROSSWALK STRIPING LF 48 10 $480.00
TURF / ESTABLISHMENT / LANDSCAPING LS 1 5000 $5,000.00
DRAINAGE MODIFICATIONS LS 1 15000 $15,000.00
AUTOMATIC VERTICAL SWING GATES EA 4 10000 $40,000.00
MOBILIZATION / DEMOBILIZATION LS 1 10900 $10,900.00 Subtotal 70,900.00$
Engineering (20%)14,180.00$
Contingency (10%) 7,090.00 $
TOTAL 92,170.00 $
Quade Street to Sherman Avenue Loop Item UnitQuantity
Unit Price Item Price
SITE PREPARATION LS 1
20000 20,000.00 $
ASPHALT ROADWAY SF 6670 35 233,450.00 $
SIDEWALK SF 2801 30 84,030.00 $
CURB LF 665 50 33,250.00$
4″ WHITE STRIPING LF 240 0.25 60.00 $
CROSSWALK STRIPING LF 32 10 320.00 $
TURF / ESTABLISHMENT / LANDSCAPING LS 1 15000 15,000.00 $
DRAINAGE MODIFICATIONS LS 1 15000 15,000.00 $
TRAFFIC SIGNS EA 3 50 150.00 $
SIGN POSTS EA 3 100 300.00 $
MOBILIZATION / DEMOBILIZATION EA 1 40200 40,200.00 $
Subtotal 421,760.00 $
Engineering (20%) 84,352.00 $
Contingency (10%)42,176.00$ TOTAL548,288.00$
Assumptions for all short term
improvements: No paving is
necessary, only street cleaning,
striping, and signs
CDM
A/GFTC – GFSD Traffic Circulation Study

SHERMANXAVENUE

SHERMANXAVENUE
SHERMANXAVENUE

SHERMANXAVENUE

SHERMANXAVENUE

SHERMANXAVENUE

SHERMANXAVENUE

SHERMANXAVENUE

SHERMANXAVENUE

SHERMANXAVENUE
SHERMANXAVENUE
SHERMANXAVENUE
SHERMANXAVENUE
SHERMANXAVENUE
SHERMANXAVENUE
SHERMANXAVENUE

STEVENSXSTREET

CORTLANDXSTREET
CORTLANDXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL

sq.ft.

1891

1609

5763
SidewalkX(removed)

SidewalkX(new)

PavementX(new)
AlternativeX1

SHERMANXAVENUE

SHERMANXAVENUE
SHERMANXAVENUE

SHERMANXAVENUE

SHERMANXAVENUE

SHERMANXAVENUE

SHERMANXAVENUE

SHERMANXAVENUE

SHERMANXAVENUE

SHERMANXAVENUE
SHERMANXAVENUE
SHERMANXAVENUE
SHERMANXAVENUE
SHERMANXAVENUE
SHERMANXAVENUE
SHERMANXAVENUE

STEVENSXSTREET

CORTLANDXSTREET
CORTLANDXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL
HIGH

SCHOOL

sq.ft.

1926

2801

6669
SidewalkX(removed)

SidewalkX(new)

PavementX(new)
AlternativeX2

GRANTXAVENUE

GRANTXAVENUE
GRANTXAVENUE
GRANTXAVENUE
GRANTXAVENUE
GRANTXAVENUE
GRANTXAVENUE
GRANTXAVENUE
GRANTXAVENUE

GRANTXAVENUE
GRANTXAVENUE
GRANTXAVENUE
GRANTXAVENUE
GRANTXAVENUE
GRANTXAVENUE
GRANTXAVENUE
SCHOOL
MIDDLE

SCHOOL
MIDDLE

SCHOOL
MIDDLE

SCHOOL
MIDDLE

SCHOOL
MIDDLE

SCHOOL
MIDDLE

SCHOOL
MIDDLE

SCHOOL
MIDDLE

SCHOOL
MIDDLE

SCHOOL
MIDDLE

SCHOOL
MIDDLE

SCHOOL
MIDDLE

SCHOOL
MIDDLE

SCHOOL
MIDDLE

SCHOOL
MIDDLE

SCHOOL
MIDDLE

SCHOOL

QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET

AUSTINXSTREET
AUSTINXSTREET
sq.ft.

94

2303

8120
SidewalkX(removed)

SidewalkX(new)

PavementX(new)

SCHOOL

MIDDLE

SCHOOL
MIDDLE

SCHOOL

MIDDLE

SCHOOL

MIDDLE

SCHOOL
MIDDLE

SCHOOL

MIDDLE

SCHOOL
MIDDLE

SCHOOL

MIDDLE

SCHOOL
MIDDLE

SCHOOL

MIDDLE

SCHOOL

MIDDLE

SCHOOL
MIDDLE

SCHOOL

MIDDLE

SCHOOL
MIDDLE

SCHOOL

MIDDLE

SCHOOL

MIDDLE

SCHOOL

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET

QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET
QUADEXSTREET

sq.ft.

195
919
5660

SidewalkX(removed)

SidewalkX(new)

PavementX(new)

AlternativeX4

PROJECT:
DATE:08/09/12
ATTACHMENT BOFF STREET PARKING AND DROP-OFF EXPANSION ALTERNATIVES AND EVALUATION COMPARISON
Alternative 1: Sherman Ave Loop
Approximate Cost:Evaluation of Features:
Site Preparation: LS 1 5000 5,000.00 $ Add. Parking 200′ (10 vehicles)
New Sidewalk: SF 1609 35 56,315.00$ Convenience Good
New Roadway: SF 5763 45 259,335.00 $ Circulation Good
Landscaping: LS 1 5000 5,000.00$ Safety Fair
Drainage: LS 1 10000 10,000.00$ Incidentals:LS120002,000.00$
Subtotal: 337,650.00$ Notes:
Engineering (10%): 33,765.00 $ Drive entrance close to Quade/Cortland and Stevens;
Contingency (20%): 67,530.00 $ Requires substantial landscaping to school green
Total: 438,945.00$
Alternative 2: Quade St to Sherman Ave Loop – PREFE RRED ALTERNATIVE
Approximate Cost:
Evaluation of Features:
Site Preparation: LS 1 8000 8,000.00 $ Add. Parking 240′ (12 vehicles)
New Sidewalk: SF 2801 35 98,035.00$ Convenience Good
New Roadway: SF 6609 45 297,405.00 $ Circulation Good
Landscaping: LS 1 7000 7,000.00$ Safety Good
Drainage: LS 1 10000 10,000.00$ Incidentals:LS130003,000.00$
Subtotal: 423,440.00$ Notes:
Engineering (10%): 42,344.00 $ Requires substantial landscaping to school green;
Contingency (20%): 84,688.00 $ Creates break in extended Quade St drop off zone
Total: 550,472.00$
Alternative 3: Grant Ave to Middle School Parking L ot
Approximate Cost:
Evaluation of Features:
Site Preparation: LS 1 5000 5,000.00 $ Add. Parking 320′ (16 vehicles)
New Sidewalk: SF 2303 35 80,605.00$ Convenience Fair
New Roadway: SF 8120 45 365,400.00 $ Circulation Fair
Landscaping: LS 1 5000 5,000.00$ Safety Fair
Drainage: LS 1 10000 10,000.00$ Incidentals:LS11500015,000.00$
Subtotal: 481,005.00$ Notes:
Engineering (10%): 48,100.50 $ Encourages access to Middle School lot, which has be en
Contingency (20%): 96,201.00$ identified as congested; Impacts to athletic fields
Total: 625,306.50$
Alternative 4: Quade Street Loop Approximate Cost:Site Preparation: LS 1 3000 3,000.00 $
Evaluation of Features:
New Sidewalk: SF 919 35 32,165.00$ Add. Parking 216′ (10 vehicles)
New Roadway: SF 5660 45 254,700.00 $ Convenience Good
Landscaping: LS 1 3000 3,000.00$ Circulation Fair
Drainage: LS 1 10000 10,000.00$ Safety Fair
Incidentals:LS150005,000.00$
Subtotal: 307,865.00$ Notes:
Engineering (10%): 30,786.50 $
Contingency (20%): 61,573.00 $
Total: 400,224.50 $
Overall: Safety concerns with the drive entrance
proximity to adjacent intersections discounted this
alternative as preferred
Overall: Reduced conflict with adjacent drives
enhances the viability of this alternative
Overall: Safety concerns with additional traffic through the congested Middle School lot, plus the
impacts to the athletic fields reduce the viability of
this alternative
Overall: Safety concerns with offset intersection
reduce the viability of this alternative
Creates new offset intersection at Quade and Shippe
y;
Potential impacts to bike racks and Middle School
entrance
A/GFTC – GFSD Traffic Circulation Study

Prepared For:
Bay Road & Cronin Road Intersection Assessment
Town of Queensbury, Warren County, NY April, 2012
Prepared By:

April 2012 Bay Rd/Cronin Rd Intersection Evaluation
Page ii
Table of Contents
Page
Table of Contents………………………………………………………………
……………………………….. ………… ii
List of Figures ………………………………………………………………
…………………………………. …………… ii
List of Tables………………………………………………………………
………………………………….. …………….iii
List of Appendices………………………………………………………………
………………………………. …………iii

Chapter 1. Introduction ………………………………………………………………
…………………………. ……… 1

A. Site Conditions ………………………………………………………………
…………………………………… 1
Chapter 2. Existing Conditions………………………………………………………………
…………………… ….. 2
A. Intersection Geometry ………………………………………………………………
…………………………. 2
B. Accident History ………………………………………………………………
………………………………….3
C. Traffic Volumes ………………………………………………………………
…………………………………..4
Chapter 3. Alternatives ………………………………………………………………
…………………………. ……… 6
A. Alternative 1 ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………. 6
B. Alternative 2 ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………. 6
C. Alternative 3 ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………. 6
D. Alternative 4 ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………. 7
Chapter 4. Evaluation ………………………………………………………………
…………………………… ……. 12
A. Traffic Analysis ………………………………………………………………
………………………………….12
1. Traffic Volume Forecasts:………………………………………………………………
…………….. 12
2. Level of Service and Capacity Analysis: …………………………………………………………. 13
B. Cost Estimates ………………………………………………………………
…………………………………. 1 5
C. Impacts………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………. 15
Chapter 5. Conclusions and Recommendations………………………………………………………………
17

List of Figures
Page
Figure 2.1 – 2012 (ETC) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes …………………………………………………………. 5

Figure 3.1 – Alternative 1: Re-stripe Northbound and Southbound Approaches ……………………. 8
Figure 3.2 – Alternative 2: Restrict Left-turns from Cronin Road with Striping Modifications……. 9
Figure 3.3 – Alternative 3: Install a Traffic Signal with Striping Modifications ………………………. 10
Figure 3.4 – Alternative 4: Construct a Single-Lane Roundabout ………………………………………. 11
Figure 4.1 – 2022 (ETC+10) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ………………………………………………….. 16

April 2012 Bay Rd/Cronin Rd Intersection Evaluation
Page iii
List of Tables
Page
Table 2.1 – Intersection Accident Summary ………………………………………………………………
……… 3

Table 4.1 – Traffic Volume Forecasts ………………………………………………………………
…………….. 12
Table 4.2 – Levels of Service………………………………………………………………
…………………….. …. 13
Table 4.3 – Peak Hour Level of Service Summary …………………………………………………………… 14
Table 4.4 – Alternatives Comparison ………………………………………………………………
……………… 15

List of Appendices
Appendix A………………………………………………………………
………………………… Accident Evalua tion
Appendix B………………………………………………………………
………………………… Traffic Volume Data
Appendix C ………………………………………………………………
………………. Signal Warrant Evaluation
Appendix D ………………………………………………………………
………………… Level of Service Analysi s
Appendix E………………………………………………………………
…………. Planning Level Cost Estimates

April 2012 Bay Rd/Cronin Rd Intersection Evaluation
Page 1
Chapter 1. Introduction
This report summarizes the results of an accident records review and the evaluation and
comparison of several intersection improvements for the Bay Road / Cronin Road intersection in
the Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York. The project location is shown in the
Google aerial image below:

A. Site Conditions
The Bay Road / Cronin Road intersection is located in the southern portion of the Town of
Queensbury approximately 1/3 mile north of the Quaker Road/NY Route 254 commercial
corridor. Bay Road (County Route 7) travels north/south through the Town connecting
Queensbury with the City of Glens Falls. Cronin Road is a Town road travelling east/west
through the Town from Bay Road to Ridge Road (NY Route 9L). There are several commercial
land uses at the intersection that impact operations including the Stewart’s Shop (with gas
pumps), the Harvest Restaurant, and the O’Leary Chiropractic Center. The intersection also
serves as the primary access route to Adirondack Community College.

Pedestrians are accommodated through a sidewalk on the west side of Bay Road extending
from Quaker Road to about 700 feet north of Cronin Road. On the east side of Bay Road, there
is a sidewalk extending from Cronin Road to Quaker Road. There are no sidewalks along
Cronin Road. Bicyclists are accommodated through a striped shoulder/bicycle lane on the east
and west sides of Bay Road north of Cronin Road.

April 2012 Bay Rd/Cronin Rd Intersection Evaluation
Page 2
Chapter 2. Existing Conditions
A. Intersection Geometry
The Bay Road / Cronin Road intersection is a four-way intersection operating under stop sign
control on the eastbound and westbound approaches. The northbound Bay Road approach to
Cronin Road provides a shared left-turn/through lane and a separate right-turn lane. The lack of
shoulder on the northbound approach makes the right-turn from Bay Road onto Cronin Road a
difficult maneuver that requires vehicle slowing and off-tracking, especially for large vehicles. In
addition, there is little separation between the travel lane and the flush sidewalk. This makes
walking in this quadrant of the intersection feel “unfriendly”, meaning that pedestrians may be
less comfortable at this location than in areas with a greater buffer between the sidewalk and
travel lane.

The southbound approach to the intersection provides a left-turn lane and a shared
through/right-turn lane with two receiving lanes exiting the intersection. The presence of two
southbound receiving lanes at the intersection creates confusion on all intersection approaches
by providing too many travel movement choices, increasing the potential for accidents. The
eastbound O’Leary Chiropractic Center driveway and westbound Cronin Road approaches
provide a single lane for shared through and turning movements. Departing the intersection,
there is a single northbound lane, two southbound lanes, a single lane eastbound on Cronin
Road and a single lane entering the chiropractor’s office. The intersection geometry is shown in
the following Bing aerial image.

Truck slowing and driving over the sidewalk to
maneuver the Bay Road northbound right-turn
movement onto Cronin Road Pedestrian walking northbound on Bay Road on the
innermost portion of the sidewalk away from vehicles

April 2012 Bay Rd/Cronin Rd Intersection Evaluation
Page 3

B. Accident History
An accident analysis was performed for the Bay Road / Cronin Road intersection using accident
data provided by the Warren County Department of Public Works and New York State
Department of Transportation. The analysis includes crashes that occurred from November 1,
2006 through December 31, 2011. Table 2.1 summarizes the accident history at the study area
intersection. In addition, a detailed accident summary sheet, collision diagram, and detailed
accident history are included in Appendix A.

Table 2.1 – Intersection Accident Summary
Accident Severity Accident Type
Fatal Injury Property
Damage
Non-
Reportable1
Total
Right Angle 0 10 19 2 31
Rear End 0 0 8 0 8
Left Turn 0 3 1 1 5
Overtaking/Sideswipe 0 0 1 0 1
Total 0 13 29 3 45 1 A non-reportable accident indicates no personal injuries occurred and property damages totaled less than $1,000.

Table 2.1 shows that there have been 45 accidents at the Bay Road / Cronin Road intersection
over the last six years. Based on the data, 30 of these accidents occurred within the last three
years. The data also shows the following:

April 2012 Bay Rd/Cronin Rd Intersection Evaluation
Page 4

 All the accidents occurred between 6:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. which suggests that
night-time visibility is not the primary contributing factor of the crash history.
 Almost 70% of the accidents involved right angle crashes between vehicles on the
Bay Road northbound and Cronin Road westbound intersection approaches.
 Almost 15% of the accidents involved two or more southbound vehicles, indicating
that there is some confusion on the southbound approach to the intersection. Rear-
end collisions are the primary accident type on the southbound approach.

The intersection improvement alternatives developed and evaluated as part of this study will
consider options to improve the two accident trends identified above: the northbound/westbound
right angle vehicle crashes and the southbound rear-end crashes.

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 is 1.37 accidents per million entering vehicles (acc/MEV) as compared to
the statewide average of 0.15 acc/MEV. It is noted that the statewide average is calculated for
state roadways only and that since the Bay Road and Cronin Road are county and local roads,
respectively, the characteristics may be slightly different.

C. Traffic Volumes
Intersection turning movement traffic counts were conducted at the Bay Road/Cronin Road
intersection on January 25, 2012 during the weekday AM peak period from 7:00 to 9:00 a.m.,
noon peak period from 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m., and the PM peak period from 3:00 to 6:00 p.m.
The raw traffic volumes are included in Appendix B. Automatic Traffic Recorders (ATRs) were
placed on all approaches to the intersection from February 2, 2012 to February 3, 2012 to
collect daily volume and travel speed data. The peak hour traffic counts provide existing traffic
conditions at the study intersection as summarized on Figure 2.1 and form the basis for all traffic
forecasts. The following observations are evident based on the existing traffic volume data:

 The weekday AM peak hour occurred from 8:00 to 9:00 a.m. Heavy vehicles and
school buses account for 1% of intersection volumes during the AM peak hour.
 The noon peak hour occurred from 12:00 to 1:00 p.m. Heavy vehicles and school
buses account for 1% of intersection volumes during the noon peak hour.
 The PM peak hour occurred from 3:15 to 4:15 p.m. Heavy vehicles and school
buses account for 1% of intersection volumes during the PM peak hour.

F:Projects2011
111-253 Bay & Cronincadddgn
figures111-253_
fig_traf.dgn
PROJECT: DATE: 111-253 04/2012 FIGURE:2.1
TRAFFIC VOLUMES

2012 (ETC) PEAK HOUR

N
306
775
CRONIN RD
BAY
RD
AM PEAK HOUR
771
472103
CRONIN RD
BAY
RD
724
496135
CRONIN RD
BAY
RD
NOON PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
WARREN COUNTY, NY
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY

BAY RD & CRONIN RD

N
N
12273140
962
006
05333160
1008
13347175
42010

April 2012 Bay Rd/Cronin Rd Intersection Evaluation
Page 6
Chapter 3. Alternatives
Based on a review of the existing traffic conditions and accident analysis, four alternatives have
been developed for evaluation. The proposed alternative and accident reduction benefit for
each is described below.

A. Alternative 1
Alternative 1 involves re-striping the northbound and southbound intersection approaches to
provide a dedicated left-turn lane and a shared through/right-turn lane on those approaches.
The two exclusive left-turn lanes would be striped opposite each other as is typical for an
intersection with a clearly delineated single departure lane. This improvement can be extended
to re-stripe Bay Road with a center two-way left-turn lane between Cronin Road and Glenwood
Avenue as shown on Figure 3.1. However, the expanded striping improvement is not needed
for accident reduction benefits at the Bay Road / Cronin Road intersection. The eastbound and
westbound intersection approaches would continue to operate under stop sign control with
single lane approaches.

By shifting the northbound travel lanes toward the Bay Road centerline and removing the right-
turn lane to create a shoulder, sight distances for vehicles on the Cronin Road approach would
be improved and off-tracking on the right-turn movement from Bay Road to Cronin Road would
be minimized. In addition, the increased buffer to the sidewalk will provide a higher level of
comfort for pedestrians walking in this area. Creating a single receiving lane on Bay Road
southbound reduces the confusion and potential for rear-end collisions on this intersection
approach. Based upon information published by the New York State Department of
Transportation in the Post Implementation Evaluation System (NYSDOT PIES), channelization,
with the addition of left-turn lanes with painted separation as proposed in this alternative, has
the potential to reduce left-turn crashes by 44%, rear end crashes by 43%, and right-angle
crashes by 46%.

B. Alternative 2
Alternative 2 includes installing the striping modifications identified in Alternative 1 in addition to
restricting left-turns and through movements from Cronin Road. This should be accomplished
through construction of a raised median on Cronin Road at the intersection as illustrated on
Figure 3.2. The physical restriction has the potential to eliminate almost 70% of the accidents at
the intersection. With the turn restriction from Cronin Road, vehicles have the option to access
Quaker Road via the traffic signal at Meadowbrook Road, which is immediately east of Cronin
Road. It is noted that with removal of the Cronin Road left-turn and through vehicles from the
intersection, the traffic volumes at the intersection do not meet the volume criteria for traffic
signal installation. Traffic signal criteria are discussed further under Alternative 3.

C. Alternative 3
Alternative 3 includes installing the re-striping improvements as identified in Alternative 1 in
conjunction with a traffic signal. Criteria for consideration of traffic signal installation are
contained in the 2009 Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (National MUTCD), published
by the Federal Highway Administration (FHW). This publication specifies the minimum criteria
which must be met in order for a new traffic signal to be justified. The satisfaction of a signal
warrant in itself is not necessarily justification for installation for a traffic signal. Other
engineering and operational factors need to be considered.

April 2012 Bay Rd/Cronin Rd Intersection Evaluation
Page 7
The existing traffic conditions, pedestrian characteristics, and physical characteristics of the
intersection were compared to the five of the nine signal warrants contained in the National
MUTCD that are applicable to this intersection. The analysis, as contained in Appendix C,
shows that the existing traffic conditions at the Bay Road / Cronin Road intersection meet the
traffic signal warrant criteria for the traffic volume warrants (warrants 1, 2, and 3). The criteria
are not met for the pedestrian volume warrant (warrant 4) or the crash experience warrant
(warrant 8). The crash experience warrant requires that “adequate trial of alternatives with
satisfactory observance and enforcement has failed to reduce the crash frequency”. Since
previous crash reduction alternatives have not been attempted at this intersection, the warrant is
not satisfied. However, due to the satisfaction of the traffic volume warrants, a traffic signal is
considered for installation at this intersection as illustrated on Figure 3.3.

Installation of a traffic signal would actively assign right of way to vehicles approaching the
intersection and reduce the need for drivers to judge the gap length for entering the traffic
stream on Bay Road, which could significantly reduce the northbound/westbound crashes.
Therefore, according to NYSDOT PIES data, in addition to the crash reduction factors as
identified with Alternative 1, installation of a traffic signal has the potential to reduced left-turn
crashes by 27%, rear end crashes by 12%, and right-angle by 42%.

D. Alternative 4
Alternative 4 includes the construction of a single-lane roundabout at the study intersection.
This improvement reduces the number and severity of crashes by reducing the potential for
conflict. Information published by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety show that
installation of a roundabout reduces the overall number of crashes by 40% and reduces the
severity, specifically injury accidents, by 80%. The roundabout provides the benefit of allowing
full movement at the intersection while reducing the potential for conflict. One primary difficulty
associated with a roundabout is the amount of space required for construction and the impacts
to private parcels. Figure 3.4 illustrates one potential alignment for the roundabout that
minimizes the number of private parcel and utility impacts.

TITLE
CRONIN RD
BAY RD
SHOPSTEWART’S
CENTERCHIROPRACTICO’LEARY
RESTAURANTHARVEST
PROJECT: DATE: 111-253 FIGURE: WARREN COUNTY, NY

TOWN OF QUEENSBURY

BAY RD & CRONIN RD

RE-STRIPE NB & SB APPROACHES

ALTERNATIVE 1

3.1
USER =
F:Projects1I-253 Bay & CronincadddgnfiguresI-253_fi
g_alt-1.dgn4/4/2012dborjas
FILE NAME = DATE/TIME =
4/2012
N
050100150200’50
1″ = 100′

T
ITLE
CRONIN RD
BAY RD
SHOPSTEWART’S
CENTERCHIROPRACTICO’LEARY
RESTAURANTHARVEST
N
0255075100’25
1″ = 50’PROJECT: DATE: 111-253 FIGURE: WARREN COUNTY, NY

TOWN OF QUEENSBURY

BAY RD & CRONIN RD

W/ STRIPING MODIFICATIONS
RESTRICT LEFT TURNS FROM CRONIN RD

ALTERNATIVE 2

3.2
USER =
F:Projects1I-253 Bay & CronincadddgnfiguresI-253_fi
g_alt-2.dgn4/4/2012dborjas
FILE NAME = DATE/TIME =
4/2012

T
ITLE
CRONIN RD
BAY RD
SHOPSTEWART’S
CENTERCHIROPRACTICO’LEARY
RESTAURANTHARVEST
N
0255075100’25
1″ = 50’PROJECT: DATE: 111-253 FIGURE: WARREN COUNTY, NY

TOWN OF QUEENSBURY

BAY RD & CRONIN RD

W/ STRIPING MODIFICATIONS
TRAFFIC SIGNAL

ALTERNATIVE 3

3.3
USER =
F:Projects1I-253 Bay & CronincadddgnfiguresI-253_fi
g_alt-3.dgn4/4/2012dborjas
FILE NAME = DATE/TIME =
4/2012

T
ITLE
CRONIN RD
BAY RD
SHOPSTEWART’S
CENTERCHIROPRACTICO’LEARY
RESTAURANTHARVEST
N
0255075100’25
1″ = 50’PROJECT: DATE: 111-253 FIGURE: WARREN COUNTY, NY

TOWN OF QUEENSBURY

BAY RD & CRONIN RD

CONSTRUCT A SINGLE-LANE ROUNDABOUT

ALTERNATIVE 4

3.4
USER =
F:Projects1I-253 Bay & CronincadddgnfiguresI-253_fi
g_alt-4.dgn4/4/2012dborjas
FILE NAME = DATE/TIME =
4/2012

April 2012 Bay Rd/Cronin Rd Intersection Evaluation
Page 12
Chapter 4. Evaluation
Four alternatives are being progressed for evaluation. The proposed alternative and accident
reduction benefit for each is described below.

A. Traffic Analysis
1. Traffic Volume Forecasts:
The design year or Estimated Time of Completion (ETC) for this project is expected during the
2012 construction season. To evaluate the four alternatives, traffic projections were prepared
for the ETC+10 (2022) conditions. The projected volumes include background traffic growth
and trips from other planned developments in the area. Based on a review of traffic volumes
collected by Creighton Manning in 2007, traffic volumes along Bay Road have increased by
approximately 2% per year over the last 5 years. Therefore, the existing 2012 traffic volumes
were increased by a 2% annual growth rate for 10 years to arrive at the 2022 background
growth volumes. Traffic from three additional projects was accounted for in the No-Build traffic
volumes. The projects include the following:

 Fairfield Professional Office, which consists of approximately 96,000 square feet
(SF) of office space to be constructed along Baybridge Drive
 Baybrook Professional Park, which consists of 40,000 SF of office space and 36
apartments to be constructed along Willowbrook Drive
 Cottage Hill, which consists of 188 condominiums to be constructed along Baybridge
Drive

The trips associated with these developments were added to the background growth volumes to
arrive at the 2022 No-Build traffic volumes as shown in Table 4.1 and Figure 4.1.

Table 4.1 – Traffic Volume Forecasts
Year ADT DDHV
Bay Road – northbound
ETC 2012 7,915 8451
ETC+10 (2022) 11,240 1,2251
Bay Road – southbound
ETC 2012 7,140 8252
ETC+10 (2022) 10,585 1,2002
Driveway – eastbound
ETC 2012 230 123
ETC+10 (2022) 275 143
Cronin Road – westbound
ETC 2012 1,500 1253
ETC+10 (2022) 1,820 1503 1 AM Peak Hour 2 Noon Peak Hour 3 PM Peak Hour
ETC = Estimated Time of Completion
ADT = Average Daily Traffic (one-way)
DDHV = Directional Design Hourly Volume (one-way)

April 2012 Bay Rd/Cronin Rd Intersection Evaluation
Page 13
2. Level of Service and Capacity Analysis:
Intersection Level of Service (LOS) and capacity analysis relate traffic volumes to the physical
characteristics of an intersection. Intersection evaluations were made using Synchro8 which
automates the procedures contained in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual . Evaluations were
also completed using SIDRA software to analyze a roundabout at the study intersection. Levels
of service range from A to F with level of service A conditions considered excellent with very
little vehicle delay while level of service F generally represents conditions with long vehicle
delays. Table 4.2 identifies the levels of service and associated delay ranges for each type of
traffic control. Appendix D contains detailed descriptions of LOS criteria for signalized,
unsignalized, and roundabout controlled intersections, the detailed level of service reports, and
detailed level of service summary tables.

Table 4.2 – Levels of Service
Control Delay (sec/veh) Level of
Service Unsignalized
Intersection
Signalized or Roundabout
Intersection
A < 10.0 < 10.0 B >10.0 and < 15.0 >10.0 and < 20.0 C >15.0 and < 25.0 >20.0 and < 35.0 D >25.0 and < 35.0 >35.0 and < 55.0 E >35.0 and < 50.0 >55.0 and < 80.0 F >50.0 >80.0

The relative impact of the four alternatives proposed can be determined by comparing the level
of service during the design year for the No-Build and Build traffic conditions. Tables 3.3
through 3.5 summarize the results of the Level of Service calculations for the AM, noon, and PM
peak hours, respectively.

Standard traffic analysis procedures call for the collection of data during the peak periods. The
peak 1-hour traffic volumes are then determined, followed by the peak 15-minute period. It is
noted that during the AM peak hours, the 15-minute interval was highly influenced by students
arriving and departing the college. Therefore, the AM peak hour results are reflective of the
concentrated college traffic.

April 2012 Bay Rd/Cronin Rd Intersection Evaluation
Page 14
Table 4.3 – Peak Hour Level of Service Summary
Intersection Configuration Bay Rd/Cronin Rd
Approach and geometry
Existing Alt 1
Re-striping
Alt 2
Re-striping &
WB restriction
Alt 3
Re-striping &
Signal
Alt 4
Roundabout
AM Peak Hour: 2012 (ETC)
Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB
Bay Rd NB Bay Rd SB B (11.0)
F (**)
A (0.4)
B (13.0) B (11.0)
F (**)
A (8.3)
B (13.1) B (11.0)
E (40.1)
A (8.3)
B (13.1) C (22.4)
C (25.9)
C (20.1)
A (4.0) A (5.8)
D (39.0)
A (6.5)
A (6.4)
Overall — — — B (16.5) A (9.3)
AM Peak Hour: 2022 (ETC+10)
Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB Bay Rd NB
Bay Rd SB B (13.3)
F (**)
A (9.0)
C (23.8) B (13.3)
F (**)
A (9.0)
C (24.4) B (13.3)
F (**)
A (9.0)
C (24.4) C (24.3)
F (131)
F (141) A (4.4) A (8.4)
F (262)
F (118) A (6.4)
Overall — — — F (103) F (98.2)
Noon Peak Hour: 2012 (ETC)
Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB Bay Rd NB
Bay Rd SB B (14.5)
F (75.3) A (0.0)
A (9.0) B (14.5)
F (101) A (9.3)
A (9.0) B (14.5)
B (11.7)
A (9.3)
A (9.0) B (15.6)
B (18.1)
A (6.1)
B (10.2) B (10.2)
B (12.4)
A (6.1)
A (6.5)
Overall — — — A (9.2) A (6.7)
Noon Peak Hour: 2022 (ETC+10)
Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB
Bay Rd NB Bay Rd SB C (21.1)
F (**)
A (0.0)
B (10.4) C (21.1)
F (**)
B (11.0)
B (10.5) C (21.1)
B (14.9)
B (11.0)
B (10.5) C (24.8)
C (28.7)
A (6.2)
B (15.3) C (25.2)
B (15.0)
A (6.4)
A (9.0)
Overall — — — B (12.6) A (8.4)
PM Peak Hour: 2012 (ETC)
Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB
Bay Rd NB Bay Rd SB C (19.0)
F (80.9)
A (0.1)
A (9.1) C (19.4)
F (124)
A (9.2)
A (9.1) C (19.4)
B (12.2)
A (9.2)
A (9.1) C (22.9)
C (27.0)
A (4.6)
A (5.3) A (9.6)
B (12.8)
A (5.9)
A (6.6)
Overall — — — A (6.9) A (6.8)
PM Peak Hour: 2022 (ETC+10)
Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB Bay Rd NB
Bay Rd SB E (45.5)
F (**)
A (0.2)
B (10.6) F (51.3)
F (**)
B (10.7)
B (10.8) F (50.3)
C (16.3) B (10.7)
B (10.8) C (22.5)
C (32.2)
A (7.6)
B (13.3) C (20.7)
B (15.8) A (6.2)
A (8.6)
Overall — — — B (12.4) A (8.2)
EB, WB, NB, SB = Eastbound, Westbound, Northbound, Southbound
X (Y.Y) = Level of Service (average delay in seconds per vehicl e) reported for the critical movement for unsignalized intersect ions
and the overall approach for signalized intersections
— = Not Applicable
** = average delay greater than 200 seconds

The level of service analysis shows that under stop control, the westbound Cronin Road
approach to the intersection generally operates at longer level of service F conditions when left-
turns are allowed. This is especially true during the AM peak hour when the college arrival
period significantly affects operations at the intersection for a 15-minute period. The analysis
also shows that as funding is available, capacity improvements or turn restrictions (as identified
in Alternatives 2, 3, and 4) should be implemented at the intersection.

April 2012 Bay Rd/Cronin Rd Intersection Evaluation
Page 15
B. Cost Estimates
The estimated costs for the four alternatives at the Bay Road/Cronin Road intersection include
both construction costs and soft costs such as design engineering, detailed cost estimates,
preparation of construction documents, public bidding process, right-of-way acquisition, and
construction inspection. The estimates are considered planning level and do not include
potential relocation of existing utilities. Based on recent bid results and prior experience with
projects on New York State highways, planning level cost estimates for each of the four
alternatives are provided below. Additional cost estimate information is included in Appendix E.

 Alternative 1 – Re-striping = $50,000
 Alternative 2 – Re-striping & Westbound Turn Restriction = $75,000
 Alternative 3 – Re-striping & Signal Installation = $200,000
 Alternative 4 – Roundabout Construction = $1,725,000

All alternative cost estimates would be increased by $125,000 if the striping improvements are
extended to Glenwood Avenue as described in the Alternative 1 narrative in Section 3.A. The
striping improvements are completed through removing and replacing the top layer of asphalt to
provide a clean surface for re-striping.

C. Impacts
Table 4.6 provides a comparison of the four intersection alternatives. The table qualifies each
alternative as having high, medium, or low impacts associated with multiple criteria and good,
adequate, or poor operational characteristics.

Table 4.4 – Alternatives Comparison
Criteria Alternative
1
Re-striping
2
Re-striping &
WB restriction
3
Re-striping &
Signal
4
Roundabout
Accident reduction benefit Medium High Medium High
Intersection operations as compared to
existing Similar Improved Improved Improved
Access impacts to adjacent properties
and drivers Low High Medium High
Right-of-way impacts
None None Low High
Utility impacts None None Potentially High High
Maintenance concerns None Medium None Medium
Traffic diversion None High Low Low
Cost $50,000 $75,000 $200,000 $1,725,000

It is noted that similar to existing conditions, intersection operations, especially during the AM
peak hour, will be poor on the Cronin Road approach to the intersection. The traffic diversion
potential for Alternatives 3 and 4 refers to the access changes that would likely occur at the
adjacent land uses and is not associated with a slightly more regional diversion.

F:Projects2011
111-253 Bay & Cronincadddgn
figures111-253_
fig_traf.dgn
PROJECT: DATE: 111-253 04/2012 FIGURE:4.1
TRAFFIC VOLUMES

2022 (ETC + 10) PEAK HOUR

N
473
1137
CRONIN RD
BAY
RD
AM PEAK HOUR
1132
688126
CRONIN RD
BAY
RD
1075
718165
CRONIN RD
BAY
RD
NOON PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
WARREN COUNTY, NY
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY

BAY RD & CRONIN RD

N
N
12789149
1176
007
06540173
10010
14057191
52012

April 2012 Bay Rd/Cronin Rd Intersection Evaluation
Page 17
Chapter 5. Conclusions and Recommendations
This report summarizes the results of an accident analysis for the Bay Road / Cronin Road
intersection and the evaluation of several intersection improvements with the potential to
mitigate the intersection crash history. The evaluation compares the benefits and impacts
associated with the four alternatives developed, including operational analyses for the ETC
(2012) and ETC+10 (2022) conditions to identify future needs at the intersection.

Based on the accident analysis, the intersection crash rate is more than nine times higher than
the statewide average for similar intersections. The analysis shows there are two primary
accident patterns at the intersection. Almost 70% off all accidents in the study period involve
crashes between northbound and westbound vehicles and nearly 15% of the accidents involve
two or more southbound vehicles. Mitigating these two crash patterns is the primary concern
when determining the preferred intersection improvement strategy.

The four alternatives under consideration include:
 Alternative 1: Re-stripe the northbound and southbound approaches to provide
separate left-turn and shared through/right-turn lanes
 Alternative 2: Re-stripe the northbound and southbound approaches to provide left-
turn and shared through/right-turn lanes and restrict westbound left-turn and through
movements by constructing a raised median.
 Alternative 3: Re-stripe the northbound and southbound approaches to provide left-
turn and shared through/right-turn lanes and install a traffic signal
 Alternative 4: Construct a single-lane roundabout

When comparing the four alternatives, Alternative 1 provides the greatest potential accident
reduction benefit for the lowest cost and impacts. It is noted that consistent with existing
conditions, the westbound Cronin Road approach to the intersection will operate at level of
service F during the three peak hours. However, the trade-off between the intersection
operations, the minimal impacts, and low cost may outweigh the intersection operations
considerations. Therefore, implementation of Alternative 1 is recommended during the 2012
spring construction season. Subsequent to implementation, intersection accident records
should be reviewed annually to confirm the effectiveness of the improvements. If the
improvements are not proving effective in reducing the number and severity of accidents at the
intersection, further measures should be implemented.

Restriction of left-turn movements from Cronin Road (Alternative 2) or installation of a traffic
signal (Alternative 3) would both further reduce the number of accidents at the Bay Road /
Cronin Road intersection. While construction of a roundabout (Alternative 4) would also reduce
the number and severity of accidents, due to the cost, this alternative is considered not feasible
at this time.

Construction of a raised median on the Cronin Road approach to Bay Road to restrict left-turns
and through movements from Cronin Road onto Bay Road would be an unpopular decision for
the general traveling public from the east. In addition, the construction of a raised median can
make snow maintenance efforts cumbersome. However, restricting the left-turn movements has
the potential to eliminate future crashes. The crash data shows that these movements account
for almost 70% of the 45 crashes experienced at the intersection over the last five years.
Drivers have alternate routes on the existing transportation network that have sufficient capacity
to accommodate the re-routed traffic.

April 2012 Bay Rd/Cronin Rd Intersection Evaluation
Page 18
Several warrants for traffic signal installation
are met and capacity analyses indicate that the
intersection would operate with improved levels
of service under traffic signal control while
generally maintaining existing traffic patterns.
However, installation of a traffic signal is
problematic due to the existing overhead
utilities at the intersection. The adjacent
photograph shows some of the overhead utility
conflicts at the intersection. Existing utility
poles would likely require relocation in order to
meet utility spacing requirements. Review of
available mapping indicates that the existing
utility poles appear to be outside of the existing
right-of-way meaning that funding for utility pole
relocation is the responsibility of the project
sponsor.

It is recommended that Alternative 1 be implemented at the Bay Road / Cronin Road
intersection during the spring/summer 2012 construction season to mitigate the existing
accident patterns at the intersection. After one year, the accident records should be reviewed to
identify the effectiveness of the re-striping effort. Growth in the corridor should also be
monitored, as the level of service analysis shows that capacity improvements should be
provided as growth in the corridor increases.

If the accident and traffic volume data indicate that additional mitigation measures are needed,
Alternative 2 or Alternative 3 could be implemented. At this time, implementation of Alternative
2 represents a logical, low-cost, minimal impact option to further address existing safety
concerns if Alternative 1 proves insufficient. However, installation of a traffic signal is also a
viable intersection improvement. Therefore, if additional improvements are needed, the County
and other involved parties will need to evaluate the potential physical impacts and costs versus
the accident reduction and capacity benefits. The evaluation should include:
 Further definition of right-of-way impacts
 Capacity analyses to confirm expected corridor growth
 Cost estimate comparison with specific utility impacts
 Funding sources and budgetary constraints

Existing overhead utility conflicts at the Bay Road /
Cronin Road intersection

Appendix A
Accident Evaluation

Transportation Assessment Bay Road/Cronin Road
Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York

Appendix B
Traffic Volume Data

Transportation Assessment Bay Road/Cronin Road
Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York

Appendix C
Signal Warrant Evaluation

Transportation Assessment Bay Road/Cronin Road
Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York

Introduction
The purpose of this evaluation is to summarize the results of a traffic signal warrant analysis at
the intersection of Bay Road and Cronin Road. The existing and future traffic conditions,
pedestrian characteristics, and physical characteristics of the intersection were compared to five
of the nine signal warrants contained in the National Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
(MUTCD). The intersection currently operates under stop sign control on the eastbound and
westbound approaches. The northbound approach provides an exclusive right-turn lane and a
shared through/left-turn lane while the southbound approach provides an exclusive left-turn lane
and a shared through/right-turn lane. The eastbound and westbound approaches provide a
single lane for shared travel movements.

Description of Warrants
Warrant 1, Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume
– This warrant is satisfied if for any eight hours of an
average day the traffic volumes for Condition A or Condition B specified in Table 4C-1 of the
MUTCD are met for the major-street and the higher volume minor-street approach to the
intersection.

Warrant 2, Four-Hour Vehicular Volume
– This warrant is met when for any four hours of an
average day, points plotted on the graph presented on Figure 4C-1 of the MUTCD fall above the
appropriate curve.

Warrant 3, Peak Hour
– This warrant is met when for any one hour of an average day, points
plotted on the graph presented on Figure 4C-3 of the MUTCD fall above the appropriate curve.

Warrant 4, Pedestrian Volume
– This warrant is satisfied when for any four hours of an average
day, points plotted on the graph presented on Figure 4C-5 of the MUTCD fall above the
appropriate curve. This warrant is also satisfied if for any one hour of an average day, points
plotted on the graph presented on Figure 4C-7 fall above the appropriate curve.

Warrant 7, Crash Experience
– This warrant is used when the severity and frequency of crashes
are the primary reason for installation of a traffic signal. This warrant is satisfied when adequate
trial of alternatives has failed to reduce the crash frequency, five or more crashes of a type
susceptible to correction by a traffic signal have occurred within the last 12 months, and when
traffic volumes at the intersection exceed the 80% thresholds identified in warrant 1 for eight
hours of an average day.

Warrants 1, 2, 3, 4, and 7 are analyzed in detail in the next section.

Detailed Signal Warrants Analysis
Warrants 1, 2, and 3
– Average hourly traffic volumes recorded by Creighton Manning and
turning movement counts serve as the basis for the signal warrant analysis. Table 1
summarizes the analysis of Warrants 1, 2, and 3. A checkmark under the “Signal Warrants
Met?” column indicates that the criteria are satisfied for that hour.

Table 1 – Summary of Signal Warrant Analysis
Existing 2012 Volumes Signal Warrants Met?
#1 Time Begin
(1-hour period) Bay Rd Cronin Rd Cond. A Cond. B #2 #3
7:00 AM 786 89 

8:00 AM 1,094 105 


9:00 AM 1,009 102 


10:00 AM 1,144 97 


11:00 AM 1,168 97 


12:00 PM 1,347 128 
 
1:00 PM 1,242 125 


2:00 PM 1,040 122 


3:00 PM 1,438 146 
 
4:00 PM 1,272 112 


5:00 PM 1,151 115 


6:00 PM 594 64
7:00 PM 481 39
8:00 PM 449 29
9:00 PM 264 29
One Lane Major Street 500 750 Required
Volumes One Lane Minor Street 150 75 See Figure
4C-1 See Figure
4C-4
Overall Warrant Met? No Yes Yes
Yes

Table 1 shows that the traffic volumes at the intersection meet the signal warrant thresholds for
installation of a traffic signal for the eight-hour, four-hour and peak hour scenarios.

Warrant 4, Pedestrian Volume
– Review of the signal warrant criteria indicates that a minimum
of 107 pedestrians crossing the major street per hour is needed to satisfy criteria A and that a
minimum of 133 pedestrians crossing the major street per hour is needed to satisfy criteria B.
The corresponding vehicular volumes are 1,100 and 1,450 vehicles on the major street,
respectively. Review of the traffic volume data shows that only one pedestrian was observed
crossing the street during the AM peak hour while 7 pedestrians were observed crossing the
street during the PM peak hour. Based upon the available data, the pedestrian and vehicle
volumes at this intersection do not meet thresholds and the warrant is not satisfied.

Warrant 7, Crash Experience
– Review of the crash data at the Bay Rd/Cronin Rd intersections
shows that there were 45 accidents reported over the last six years, eleven of which occurred
within the last 12 months. The 45 reported accidents included 31 right-angle, 8 rear end, 5 left-
turn, and one overtaking accident. The right-angle, rear-end and left-turn accidents are
susceptible to correction by a traffic signal. However, installation of a traffic signal based upon
the crash experience warrant requires “adequate trial of alternatives with satisfactory
observance and enforcement has failed to reduce the crash frequency”.

Recommendation
The above analysis shows that the existing traffic conditions at the Bay Road/Cronin Road
intersection meet the traffic signal warrant criteria for Warrants 1, 2, and 3. Therefore, a traffic
signal should be considered for installation at this intersection.

Figure 4C-1
Four-Hour Vehicular Volume Warrant
Source: Federal MUTCD
0
100 200 300 400
500
600 700 800
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 Major Street-Total of Both Approaches-Vehicles Per Hour (VPH)
Minor Street Higher-Volume Approach-VPH
1 lane artery approaches and1 lane side road approaches

Figure 4C-3
Peak Hour Volume Warrant
Source: Federal MUTCD
0
100 200 300
400
500 600 700
800
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 Major Street-Total of Both Approaches-Vehicles Per Hour (VPH)
Minor Street Higher-Volume Approach-VPH
1 lane artery approaches and 1 lane side road approaches

Appendix D
Level of Service Analysis

Transportation Assessment Bay Road/Cronin Road
Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York

LOS Definitions

The following is an excerpt from the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual
(HCM).

Level of Service for Signalized Intersections
Level of service for a signalized intersection is define d in terms of control delay, which is a measure of
driver discomfort, frustration, fuel consumption, an d increased travel time. The delay experienced by a
motorist is made up of a number of factors that relate to control, geometrics, traffic, and incidents. Total
delay is the difference between the travel time actual ly experienced and the reference travel time that
would result during base conditions: in the absence of traffic control, geometric delay, any incidents, and
any other vehicles. Specifically, LOS criteria for traffic signals are stated in terms of the average control
delay per vehicle, typically for a 15-minute analysis period. Delay is a complex measure and depends on
a number of variables, including the quality of progress ion, the cycle length, the green ratio, and the v/c
ratio for the lane group. Levels of service are defined to represent r easonable ranges in control delay.

LOS A describes operations with low control delay, up to 10 s/veh. This LOS occurs when progression is
extremely favorable and most vehicles arrive during the green phase. Many vehicles do not stop at all.
Short cycle lengths may tend to contribute to low delay.

LOS B describes operations with control delay greater than 10 and up to 20 s/veh. This level generally
occurs with good progression, short cy cle lengths, or both. More vehicles stop than with LOS A, causing
higher levels of delay.

LOS C describes operations with contro l delay greater than 20 and up to 35 s/veh. These higher delays
may result from only fair progression, longer cycle l engths, or both. Individual cycle failures may begin to
appear at this level. Cycle failure occurs when a given green phase does not serve queued vehicles, and
overflows occur. The number of v ehicles stopping is significant at this level, though many still pass
through the intersection without stopping.

LOS D describes operations with contro l delay greater than 35 and up to 55 s/veh. At LOS D, the
influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays may result from some combination of
unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, and high v/ c ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the proportion
of vehicles not stopping declines. Individual cycle failures are noticeable.

LOS E describes operations with control delay greater th an 55 and up to 80 s/veh. These high delay
values generally indicate poor progression, long cycl e lengths, and high v/c ratios. Individual cycle
failures are frequent.

LOS F describes operations with control delay in ex cess of 80 s/veh. This level, considered
unacceptable to most drivers, often occurs with oversa turation, that is, when arrival flow rates exceed the
capacity of lane groups. It may also occur at high v/c ratios with many individual cycle failures. Poor
progression and long cycle lengths may also be contribute significantly to high delay levels.

Average control delay and queue length at roundabout controlled intersections are calculated using
SIDRA Intersection. The physical geometry such as entry lane width and approach flare, and traffic
volume at the roundabout are factor s that influence the intersection’s performance. The average delay
reported using SIRA Intersection is based on the HCM Method of Delay for Level-of-Service.

Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections

Four measures are used to describe the performance of two-way stop controlled intersections: control
delay, delay to major street through vehicles, queue l ength, and v/c ratio. The primary measure that is
used to provide an estimate of LOS is control delay. This measure can be estimated for any movement
on the minor (i.e., stop-controlled) street. By summing delay estimates for individual movements, a delay
estimate for each minor street movement and mino r street approach can be achieved. The level of
service criteria is given in Exhibit 17-2/22.

For all-way stop controlled (AWSC) intersections, the average control delay (in seconds per vehicle) is
used as the primary measure of performance. Control delay is the increased time of travel for a vehicle
approaching and passing through an AWSC intersection, compared with a free-flow vehicle if it were not
required to slow or stop at the intersection.

Exhibit 17-2/22: Level-of-Service Crit eria for Stop Controlled Intersections
Level of Service Control Delay (sec/veh)
A < 10.0 B >10.0 and < 15.0 C >15.0 and < 25.0 D >25.0 and < 35.0 E >35.0 and < 50.0 F >50.0

2012 AM Peak Hour
Intersection 2012 Existing Alt 1 Re-striping Alt 2 Re-striping & WB restriction
Alt 3 Re-striping & Signal
Alt 4 Roundabout
Bay Rd/Cronin Rd Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB
Bay Rd NB
Cronin Rd SB LTR
LTR
LT
R
L
TR B (11.0)
F (**)
A (0.4)
A (0.0)
B (13.0)
A (0.0)
Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB
Bay Rd NB
Cronin Rd SB LTR
L(TR)
L
L B (11.0)
F (**)
A (8.3)
B (13.1) B (11.0)
E (42.7)
A (8.3)
B (13.1)
Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB Bay Rd NB

Cronin Rd SB LTR
LTR
L
TR
L
TR C (22.4)
C (25.9) A (2.3)
C (20.3) A (7.3)
A (3.7)
Overalll
B (16.5) Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB Bay Rd NB
Cronin Rd SB LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR A (5.8)
D (39.0) A (6.5)
A (6.4)
Overall A (9.3)
Bay Rd/Glenwood Ave/Lowe’s Dwy Glenwood Ave EB
Lowe’s Dwy WB

Bay Rd NB
Bay Rd SB LTR
L,
LT
R
L
T,TR
L
T,TR E (56.6)
E (56.8)
E (56.0)
D (50.6)
C (20.5)
C (28.4)
C (21.8)
C (26.7) E (56.6)
D (56.8)
D (56.0)
D (50.6)
C (20.4)
C (28.4)
C (21.8)
C (26.3)
Overall
D (37.6) D (37.8)
Bay Rd/Quaker Rd Quaker Rd EB

Quaker Rd WB

Bay Rd NB
Bay Rd SB
L
T,TR
L
T,T
R
L
T,TR
L
T,TR B (14.3)
C (21.8)
B (15.8)
C (24.6) B (12.2)
C (24.0)
C (33.1)
C (22.0)
C (30.4) B (14.3)
C (21.4)
B (15.6)
C (24.7) B (12.3)
C (24.1)
C (33.1)
C (22.4)
C (30.5)
Overall
C (23.7) C (23.6)
Glenwood Ave/Quaker Rd Quaker Rd EB

Quaker Rd WB
Glenwood Ave NB

Glenwood Ave SB L
T,TR
L
T,TR
L
TR
L
TR B (18.7)
B (18.2)
C (20.8)
C (21.8)
C (25.8)
C (28.8)
C (26.3)
C (27.3) B (19.0)
B (18.4)
C (20.5)
C (21.8)
C (26.1)
C (29.1)
C (26.6)
C (27.5)
Overalll
C (21.1) C (21.1)
S = Signalized, R = Roundabout, TW = Two-Way Stop intersection.EB, WB, NB, SB = Eastbound, Westbound,
Northbound, Southbound
L, T, R = Left-turn, Through, Right-turn movements
X (Y.Y) = Level of Service (average delay per vehicle in seconds)

2022 AM Peak Hour
Intersection 2022 Existing Alt 1 Re-striping Alt 2 Re-striping & WB restriction
Alt 3 Re-striping & Signal
Alt 4 Roundabout
Bay Rd/Cronin Rd Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB
Bay Rd NB
Cronin Rd SB LTR
LTR
LT
R
L
TR B (13.3)
F (**)
A (9.0)
A (0.0)
C (23.8)
A (0.0)
Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB
Bay Rd NB
Cronin Rd SB LTR
L(TR)
L
L B (13.3)
F (**)
A (9.0)
C (24.4) B (13.3)
F (**)
A (9.0)
C (24.4)
Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB Bay Rd NB

Cronin Rd SB LTR
LTR
L
TR
L
TR C (24.3)
F (131) A (1.8)
F (142) A (8.3)
A (4.4)
Overalll
F (103) Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB Bay Rd NB
Cronin Rd SB LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR A (8.4)
F (262)
F (118) A (6.4)
Overall F (98.2)
Bay Rd/Glenwood Ave/Lowe’s Dwy Glenwood Ave EB
Lowe’s Dwy WB

Bay Rd NB
Bay Rd SB LTR
L,
LT
R
L
T,TR
L
T,TR F (275)
E (57.2)
E (56.3)
D (50.5) B (16.6)
C (25.8)
B (18.9)
C (24.1) F (**)
E (57.2)
E (56.3)
D (50.5) B (16.4)
C (25.8)
B (18.9)
C (23.7)
Overall
F (103) F (105)
Bay Rd/Quaker Rd Quaker Rd EB

Quaker Rd WB

Bay Rd NB
Bay Rd SB
L
T,TR
L
T,T
R
L
T,TR
L
T,TR C (27.8)
C (27.5)
B (19.9)
C (30.8) B (15.0)
C (30.5)
D (44.7)
C (28.9)
D (37.2) C (28.0)
C (26.9)
B (19.6)
C (31.2) B (15.2)
C (30.9)
D (45.5)
C (29.1)
D (37.4)
Overall
C (30.6) C (30.6)
Glenwood Ave/Quaker Rd Quaker Rd EB

Quaker Rd WB
Glenwood Ave NB

Glenwood Ave SB L
T,TR
L
T,TR
L
TR
L
TR D (37.0)
B (19.9)
C (25.8)
C (23.7)
C (30.3)
D (41.9)
C (30.4)
C (32.0) D (38.3)
C (20.1)
C (25.5)
C (23.7)
C (30.6)
D (42.8)
C (30.7)
C (32.2)
Overalll
C (26.0) C (26.2)
S = Signalized, R = Roundabout, TW = Two-Way Stop intersection.EB, WB, NB, SB = Eastbound, Westbound,
Northbound, Southbound
L, T, R = Left-turn, Through, Right-turn movements
X (Y.Y) = Level of Service (average delay per vehicle in seconds)

2012 Noon Peak Hour
Intersection 2012 Existing Alt 1 Re-striping Alt 2 Re-striping & WB restriction
Alt 3 Re-striping & Signal
Alt 4 Roundabout
Bay Rd/Cronin Rd Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB
Bay Rd NB
Cronin Rd SB LTR
LTR
LT
R
L
TR B (14.5)
F (75.3)
A (0.0)
A (0.0)
A (9.0)
A (0.0)
Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB
Bay Rd NB
Cronin Rd SB LTR
L(TR)
L
L B (14.5)
F (101)
A (9.3)
A (9.0) B (14.5)
B (12.7)
A (9.3)
A (9.0)
Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB Bay Rd NB

Cronin Rd SB LTR
LTR
L
TR
L
TR B (15.6)
B (18.1) A (3.6)
A (6.1)
A (4.0)
B (10.7)
Overalll
A (9.2) Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB Bay Rd NB
Cronin Rd SB LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR B (10.2)
B (12.4) A (6.1)
A (6.5)
Overall A (6.7)
Bay Rd/Glenwood Ave/Lowe’s Dwy Glenwood Ave EB
Lowe’s Dwy WB

Bay Rd NB
Bay Rd SB LTR
L,
LT
R
L
T,TR
L
T,TR C (27.0)
C (32.7)
C (32.6)
C (27.8)
B (17.5)
B (19.0)
B (15.5)
C (23.6) C (25.5)
C (31.6)
C (31.5)
C (26.9) B (17.3)
B (19.3)
B (15.9)
C (23.3)
Overall
C (23.5) C (23.0)
Bay Rd/Quaker Rd Quaker Rd EB

Quaker Rd WB

Bay Rd NB
Bay Rd SB
L
T,TR
L
T,T
R
L
T,TR
L
T,TR C (29.8)
C (27.1)
B (19.8)
C (30.8) B (13.5)
C (30.5)
D (40.0)
C (27.6)
D (35.4) C (31.6)
C (26.1)
B (19.4)
C (30.9) B (13.5)
C (31.2)
D (40.9)
C (28.2)
D (36.0)
Overall
C (30.0) C (30.1)
Glenwood Ave/Quaker Rd Quaker Rd EB

Quaker Rd WB
Glenwood Ave NB

Glenwood Ave SB L
T,TR
L
T,TR
L
TR
L
TR C (28.6)
C (22.2)
C (28.6)
C (26.3)
D (35.1)
F (94.9)
C (31.1)
D (40.1) C (28.6)
C (21.9)
C (27.9)
C (26.4)
D (35.4)
F (98.2)
C (31.6)
D (39.0)
Overalll
C (32.3) C (32.3)
S = Signalized, R = Roundabout, TW = Two-Way Stop intersection.EB, WB, NB, SB = Eastbound, Westbound,
Northbound, Southbound
L, T, R = Left-turn, Through, Right-turn movements
X (Y.Y) = Level of Service (average delay per vehicle in seconds)

2022 Noon Peak Hour
Intersection 2022 Existing Alt 1 Re-striping Alt 2 Re-striping & WB restriction
Alt 3 Re-striping & Signal
Alt 4 Roundabout
Bay Rd/Cronin Rd Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB
Bay Rd NB
Cronin Rd SB LTR
LTR
LT
R
L
TR C (21.1)
F (**)
A (0.0)
A (0.0)
B (10.4)
A (0.0)
Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB
Bay Rd NB
Cronin Rd SB LTR
L(TR)
L
L C (21.1)
F (**)
B (11.0)
B (10.5) C (21.1)
C (18.6)
B (11.0)
B (10.5)
Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB Bay Rd NB

Cronin Rd SB LTR
LTR
L
TR
L
TR C (24.8)
C (28.7) A (2.1)
A (6.2)
A (3.2)
B (16.0)
Overalll
B (12.6) Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB Bay Rd NB
Cronin Rd SB LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR C (25.2)
B (15.0) A (6.4)
A (9.0)
Overall A (8.4)
Bay Rd/Glenwood Ave/Lowe’s Dwy Glenwood Ave EB
Lowe’s Dwy WB

Bay Rd NB
Bay Rd SB LTR
L,
LT
R
L
T,TR
L
T,TR D (38.5)
D (38.6)
D (38.6)
C (32.7)
C (24.0)
C (23.3)
B (18.3)
E (56.8) D (38.5)
D (38.6)
D (38.6)
C (32.7)
C (24.0)
C (23.3)
B (18.3)
D (42.4)
Overall
D (42.8) D (35.8)
Bay Rd/Quaker Rd Quaker Rd EB

Quaker Rd WB

Bay Rd NB
Bay Rd SB
L
T,TR
L
T,T
R
L
T,TR
L
T,TR F (88.7)
C (29.2)
C (32.1)
D (36.1) B (15.6)
E (66.5)
E (62.1) F (96.4)
E (55.8) F (95.0)
C (28.5)
C (31.0)
D (36.5) B (15.4)
E (70.6)
E (64.9) F (87.1)
D (53.9)
Overall
D (47.8) D (47.4)
Glenwood Ave/Quaker Rd Quaker Rd EB

Quaker Rd WB
Glenwood Ave NB

Glenwood Ave SB L
T,TR
L
T,TR
L
TR
L
TR E (62.6)
C (31.8)
C (33.4)
C (34.5)
D (40.1)
F (**)
C (32.8) F (92.3) E (63.9)
C (31.9)
C (33.3)
D (36.7)
D (40.4)
F (**)
C (33.0) E (75.6)
Overalll
E (58.2) E (57.2)
S = Signalized, R = Roundabout, TW = Two-Way Stop intersection.EB, WB, NB, SB = Eastbound, Westbound,
Northbound, Southbound
L, T, R = Left-turn, Through, Right-turn movements
X (Y.Y) = Level of Service (average delay per vehicle in seconds)

2012 PM Peak Hour
Intersection 2012 Existing Alt 1 Re-striping Alt 2 Re-striping & WB restriction
Alt 3 Re-striping & Signal
Alt 4 Roundabout
Bay Rd/Cronin Rd Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB
Bay Rd NB
Cronin Rd SB LTR
LTR
LT
R
L
TR C (19.0)
F (80.9)
A (0.1)
A (0.0)
A (9.1)
A (0.0)
Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB
Bay Rd NB
Cronin Rd SB LTR
L(TR)
L
L C (19.4)
F (124)
A (9.2)
A (9.1) C (19.4)
B (12.9)
A (9.2)
A (9.1)
Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB Bay Rd NB

Cronin Rd SB LTR
LTR
L
TR
L
TR C (22.9)
C (27.0) A (2.1)
A (4.6)
A (2.4)
A (5.3)
Overalll
A (6.9) Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB Bay Rd NB
Cronin Rd SB LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR C (20.7)
B (15.8) A (6.2)
A (8.6)
Overall A (8.2)
Bay Rd/Glenwood Ave/Lowe’s Dwy Glenwood Ave EB
Lowe’s Dwy WB

Bay Rd NB
Bay Rd SB LTR
L,
LT
R
L
T,TR
L
T,TR C (26.4)
C (31.9)
C (31.7)
C (27.2)
B (17.4)
B (19.3)
B (15.5)
C (22.9) C (24.8)
C (30.8)
C (30.6)
C (26.2) B (17.1)
B (19.6)
B (15.8)
C (22.4)
Overall
C (22.8) C (22.3)
Bay Rd/Quaker Rd Quaker Rd EB

Quaker Rd WB

Bay Rd NB
Bay Rd SB
L
T,TR
L
T,T
R
L
T,TR
L
T,TR D (42.7)
C (26.0)
B (19.7)
C (32.7) B (14.6)
D (36.2)
D (45.0)
C (31.9)
D (38.9) D (44.4)
C (25.0)
B (19.2)
C (32.8) B (14.5)
D (37.2)
D (46.7)
C (32.4)
D (39.5)
Overall
C (32.9) C (33.1)
Glenwood Ave/Quaker Rd Quaker Rd EB

Quaker Rd WB
Glenwood Ave NB

Glenwood Ave SB L
T,TR
L
T,TR
L
TR
L
TR D (38.3)
C (27.5)
C (30.0)
C (30.5)
D (38.4)
E (63.0)
C (32.0) E (56.9) D (38.7)
C (27.4)
C (29.6)
C (31.9)
D (38.2)
E (62.4)
C (32.2)
D (50.4)
Overalll
C (34.7) C (34.4)
S = Signalized, R = Roundabout, TW = Two-Way Stop intersection.EB, WB, NB, SB = Eastbound, Westbound,
Northbound, Southbound
L, T, R = Left-turn, Through, Right-turn movements
X (Y.Y) = Level of Service (average delay per vehicle in seconds)

2022 PM Peak Hour
Intersection 2022 Existing Alt 1 Re-striping Alt 2 Re-striping & WB restriction
Alt 3 Re-striping & Signal
Alt 4 Roundabout
Bay Rd/Cronin Rd Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB
Bay Rd NB
Cronin Rd SB LTR
LTR
LT
R
L
TR E (45.5)
F (**)
A (0.2)
A (0.0)
B (10.6)
A (0.0)
Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB
Bay Rd NB
Cronin Rd SB LTR
L(TR)
L
L F (51.3)
F (**)
B (10.7)
B (10.8) F (51.3)
C (19.1)
B (10.7)
B (10.8)
Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB Bay Rd NB

Cronin Rd SB LTR
LTR
L
TR
L
TR C (22.5)
C (32.2) A (2.5)
A 97.7) A (3.1)
B (13.7)
Overalll
B (12.4) Chiropractor EB
Cronin Rd WB Bay Rd NB
Cronin Rd SB LTR
LTR
LTR
LTR
Overall

Bay Rd/Glenwood Ave/Lowe’s Dwy Glenwood Ave EB
Lowe’s Dwy WB

Bay Rd NB
Bay Rd SB LTR
L,
LT
R
L
T,TR
L
T,TR D (36.1)
D (38.5)
D (38.1)
C (32.5)
C (26.7)
C (24.3)
B (18.7)
D (49.3) D (36.1)
D (38.5)
D (38.1)
C 932.5) C (26.7)
C (24.3)
B (18.7)
D (36.5)
Overall
D (38.5) C (32.6)
Bay Rd/Quaker Rd Quaker Rd EB

Quaker Rd WB

Bay Rd NB
Bay Rd SB
L
T,TR
L
T,T
R
L
T,TR
L
T,TR F (134.)
C (28.4)
C (24.8)
D (37.2) B (15.4)
F (114)
F (103)
F (85.2)
E (63.2) F (143)
C (27.7)
C (24.1)
D (38.0) B (15.1)
F (120)
F (109)
E (75.2)
E (58.7)
Overall
E (58.7) E (58.9)
Glenwood Ave/Quaker Rd Quaker Rd EB

Quaker Rd WB
Glenwood Ave NB

Glenwood Ave SB L
T,TR
L
T,TR
L
TR
L
TR E (65.2)
D (38.4)
D (41.4) E (73.9)
D (40.8)
F (138)
C (33.1) F (**) E (65.2)
D (38.4)
D (41.4) F (84.5)
D (40.8)
F (138)
C (33.1) F (165)
Overalll
E (78.0) E (76.9)
S = Signalized, R = Roundabout, TW = Two-Way Stop intersection.EB, WB, NB, SB = Eastbound, Westbound,
Northbound, Southbound
L, T, R = Left-turn, Through, Right-turn movements
X (Y.Y) = Level of Service (average delay per vehicle in seconds)

Appendix E
Planning Level Cost Estimates

Transportation Assessment Bay Road/Cronin Road
Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York

DATA    ANALYSIS    SOLUTIONS

Lincoln Avenue
Traffic Calming
Study
Glens Falls, NY

Prepared for:
Adirondack/Glens Falls
Transportation Council

Final Report

28 October 2011
 

Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study 
 
28 October 2011 i 
Final Report 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Prepared by:  
 
 
 
Prepared for:  
The Adirondack/Glens Falls Transportation Council 
11 South Street, Suite 203 
Glens Falls, NY 12801 
(518) 223‐0086 
www.agftc.org 

 

Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study 
ii  28 October 2011 
Final Report 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 
1. INTRODUCTION 1 
1.1 Study Area Overview ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 1 
2. TRAFFIC CALMING OPTIONS 3 
2.1 Traffic Calming Overview ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 3 
2.2 Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Plan Options ………………………………………………………………….. 6 
3. SPEED PERCEPTION SURVEY 6 
4. DEMONSTRATION PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION AND RESULTS 9 
4.1 Traffic Speeds ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 10 
4.2 Traffic Counts ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 12 
4.3 Residents’ Questionnaire ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 13 
5. CONCLUSIONS 16 
APPENDICES 
Appendix A: Traffic Calming Concept Plans
Appendix B: Speed Perception Survey
Appendix C: Traffic Count and Speed Data
Appendix D: Residents’ Questionnaire
LIST OF FIGURES 
Figure 1: Study Area …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 3 
Figure 2: Traffic Calming Education Strategy Examples …………………………………………………………………….. 4 
Figure 3: Traffic Calming Engineering Strategy Examples ………………………………………………………………….. 5 
Figure 4: Speed Perception Survey on Lincoln Avenue ‐ June 8, 2011 ………………………………………………… 7 
Figure 5: Regression Analysis of Speed Perception Survey Results …………………………………………………….. 8 
Figure 6: 
Temporary Striping Delineates Parking and Travel Lane Edge ……………………………………………… 9 
Figure 7: Temporary Striping Plan: Stop Bars and Parking at the Crandall Street Intersection …………….. 10 
Figure 8: Portable Radar Speed Feedback Sign Installed on Lincoln Avenue ……………………………………… 10 
Figure 9: Speed Data on Lincoln Avenue ………………………………………………………………………………………. 11 
LIST OF TABLES 
Table 1: Effectiveness of Traffic Calming Measures …………………………………………………………………………. 4 
Table 2: Summary of Speed Perception Survey Results ……………………………………………………………………. 8 

Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study 
 
28 October 2011 iii 
Final Report 

Table 3: Lincoln Avenue Observed Speeds versus Posted Speed ……………………………………………………… 11 
Table 4: Lincoln Avenue Speed Data Statistics ………………………………………………………………………………. 12 
Table 5: Change in Average Weekday Traffic Volumes …………………………………………………………………… 13 
Table 6: Change in Average Weekend Traffic Volumes …………………………………………………………………… 13 
Table 7: Response to Question 1 …………………………………………………………………………………………………. 14 
Table 8: Responses
 to Question 2 ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 14 
Table 9: Responses to Question 3 ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 15 
Table 10: Responses to Question 4 ………………………………………………………………………………………………. 15 

Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study 
28 October 2011 1 
Final Report 

1. INTRODUCTION 
The purpose of this study is to identify and evaluate the effectiveness of selected traffic calming
measures to address concerns about vehicle speed and related safety issues on residential streets in
Glens Falls, New York. Lincoln Avenue, a residential street located northwest of downtown Glens
Falls, was selected as a case study to test the effect of striping and a speed feedback sign on vehicle
speeds. Lincoln Avenue was selected because residents had voiced concerns about speeding. The
goal is to identify low‐cost traffic calming options which might be effective along other residential
streets in the city. The study includes the following major components:
 A speed perception survey was conducted to determine a speed that would be acceptable to
residents.
 Two traffic calming plans were developed and reviewed with Glens Falls city officials as possible
alternatives. The alternatives included a line striping plan and a roadway design plan that
recommended physical changes to the street. The city agreed to a demonstration project to test
the effectiveness of the line striping plan in the field.
 The line striping plan was implemented using temporary pavement markings. During a second
phase of the demonstration project, a speed feedback sign was installed. Traffic count and speed
data were collected on Lincoln Avenue and parallel streets during both phases of the
demonstration project. The report summarizes and evaluates the data and compares the results
to the target speed determined from the speed perception survey.
 A questionnaire was distributed to all households along Lincoln Avenue during the
demonstration project to gather residents’ opinions about speeding, traffic, and the effectiveness
of the striping plan.
This report provides additional detail on each of these steps and includes findings and
recommendations.
The study is funded by the Adirondack/Glens Falls Transportation Council (AGFTC) and has been
prepared by Resource Systems Group, a traffic engineering and transportation planning consulting
firm.
1.1 Study Area Overview  
Lincoln Avenue extends for approximately 0.30 miles between its intersection with Glen Street (US
9) in the east and Kensington Road in the west. Davis Street and Crandall Street also intersect
Lincoln Avenue at mid‐block locations. The intersections are configured and controlled as follows:
 Lincoln Avenue‐Glen Street: Three‐legged “T” configuration with stop sign on the Lincoln
Avenue eastbound approach.
 Lincoln Avenue‐Davis Street: Three‐legged “T” configuration with stop sign on the Davis Street
northbound approach.
 Lincoln Avenue‐Crandall Street: Four‐legs with stop signs on all approaches (all‐way stop).

Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study 
2  28 October 2011 
Final Report 

 Lincoln Avenue‐Kensington Street: Three‐legged “T” configuration with stop signs on all
approaches (all‐way stop).the Lincoln Avenue westbound approach.
Lincoln Avenue attracts cut‐through traffic by providing an alternate route between Glen Street and
Aviation Road in Queensbury via Kensington Avenue and Dixon Road; and between downtown
Glens Falls and Queensbury via Crandall Street. Lincoln Avenue is also used to access Kensington
Road Elementary School (Figure 1).
Lincoln Avenue is on a straight alignment (no curves) and its pavement width is 40 feet between
curbs. On‐street parking is allowed on each side of the street. There are no pavement markings
delineating on‐street parking or the travel lanes. Each side of the street also has a five‐foot wide
green strip and five‐foot wide sidewalks. The posted speed limit is 30 mph, which is typical for
residential streets in Glens Falls.
During site visits the consultants observed only a few parked along the street
1. As a result, Lincoln
Avenue is perceived as a wide, straight street which may encourage faster travel speeds.
The land use along Lincoln Avenue is almost entirely residential with the exception of an office
building near the Glen Street intersection (former orthodontist office) and a church at the
intersection with Davis Street. Houses on the south side of the street have driveways with direct
access to Lincoln Avenue. Some houses Most of the houses on the north side have driveways that
connect to an alley that runs between Lincoln Avenue and Coolidge Avenue.
The study area also includes Coolidge Avenue and Horicon Avenue, which are located one and two
blocks north of Lincoln Avenue respectively. These two streets have a similar east‐west orientation,
similar roadway characteristics, and also attract the same cut‐through traffic patterns as Lincoln
Avenue. An unintended and undesirable consequence of reducing speeds on Lincoln Avenue could
be a shift in traffic to these two other streets.

1 On‐street parking used to be concentrated during working hours on the eastern end of Lincoln Avenue near
an orthodontist office. The orthodontist moved during the course of the study, and on‐street parking has
reduced.

Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study 
28 October 2011 3 
Final Report 

Figure 1: Study Area 
 
2. TRAFFIC CALMING OPTIONS 
Traffic calming has been evolving for many years and there are numerous resources and design
guides that can be referenced for additional information. This section of the report defines traffic
calming and provides a brief overview of the typical strategies and their effectiveness. The traffic
calming options that were developed for Lincoln Avenue are also described.
2.1 Traffic Calming Overview 
Traffic calming includes enforcement, education and engineering (roadway design) strategies that
alter motorist behavior to reduce vehicle speeds and/or cut‐through traffic, in the interest of street
safety, livability, and other public purposes. Enforcement includes police presence to issue
warnings or speeding violation tickets. Examples of educational strategies include: a dynamic
speed feedback sign, gateway signs, and a pace car program where local drivers make a
commitment to drive at the posted speed (Figure 2).
Qu e e n sb u r y Cut‐thru
Kensington
Elementary

Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study 
4  28 October 2011 
Final Report 
Figure 2: Traffic Calming Education Strategy Examples 
 
Speed Feedback Sign Gateway Sign Pace Car Program Bumper Stickers 
Engineering strategies include physical changes to the roadway that encourage slower speeds.
Examples include changes to the horizontal alignment to eliminate the perception of a long, straight
street; options to reduce the vehicle travel lane width; and gateway and intersection treatments
(Figure 3). While physical changes have been shown to be effective (Table 1), they have to be
considered carefully relative to drainage, emergency vehicle access, snow plowing, additional
maintenance, and the potential to divert traffic from “calmed” streets to other roadways.
Table 1: Effectiveness of Traffic Calming Measures 
 
Traffic Calming MeasureSpeed 
ReductionVolume 
ReductionCrash 
Re ducti on
Speed Radar Signs 6‐25%
N.A. N.A.
Speed Humps 9‐23%N.A.11‐45%
Raised Intersection 1%
N.A. N.A.
Traffic Ci rcl e 11%N.A.29‐73%
Center Island Narrowing 7%
N.A. N.A.
Chok e r 14% 20%N.A.
N.A. = Not Available
Source: http://www.trafficcalming.org/effectiveness.html

Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study 
28 October 2011 5 
Final Report 

Figure 3: Traffic Calming Engineering Strategy Examples2 
 
Chicanes are used to alter the horizontal alignment of a street.  
 
Chokers reduce width of vehicle travel lanes, provide pockets of 
on‐street parking and allow for access to driveways.  
 
Mid‐block speed tables require vehicles to travel at slower speeds 
to avoid jarring and to maintain a smooth ride. 
(TrafficCalming.org) 
 
Traffic circles at internal intersections require slower speeds to 
negotiate and help reduce cut‐through traffic.  
 
Bulbouts at intersections reduce crossing distances for 
pedestrians and require slower turning speeds for vehicles.  
 
On‐street parking helps reduce speeds by narrowing a travel 
lane and creating side friction. 
2 Unless otherwise noted, source for images: Pennsylvania’s Traffic Calming Handbook, PA DOT, 2001 

Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study 
6  28 October 2011 
Final Report 

2.2  Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Plan Options 
The following two traffic calming plan alternatives were prepared for Lincoln Avenue:
 Alternative 1 ‐ Line Striping. This plan delineates an on‐street parking lane, defines the
edge of the travel lane, adds stop bars to emphasize stop signs, and adds a cross‐walk at
Davis and Crandall Streets. The longitudinal parking/edge line is intended to create the
appearance of a more narrow street, which is particularly important during times when
there are fewer cars parked on‐street. The stop‐bars at Crandall Street are proposed to help
address a lack of compliance with the stop signs.
 Alternative 2 – Physical Changes. This plan proposes physical changes to the roadway
design. Major features include bulbouts at the Glen Street, Davis Street and Kensington
Street intersections, a traffic circle and cross‐walks at the Crandall Street intersection and
neck‐downs at mid‐block locations. Pockets of on‐street parking would remain throughout
most of the street.
Concept plans for each alternative are contained in Appendix A.
Both plans were presented to city officials including the Mayor, Police Chief, Fire Department Chief
and the Director of Public Works. The A/GFTC staff met with the Glens Falls Board of Public Safety
to present the two traffic calming plan alternatives. After considering input from the city, and the
project goal of finding low cost and easy to implement strategies to reduce speeds, the A/GFTC and
consultants decided to limit the field test to the line‐striping alternative and add a second phase of
analysis that added a portable speed feedback sign.
3. SPEED PERCEPTION SURVEY 
Before implementing the demonstration project, a target design speed was determined by
conducting a speed perception survey. This section of the report describes the purpose of the speed
perception survey, the methodology, and results.
Posted speed limits are typically based on an engineering study that considers roadway
characteristics such as vehicle travel lane width, number and spacing of driveways, sight distance
and the observed speeds of cars travelling on the roadway. The methodology relies heavily on the
85
th percentile speed of vehicles travelling along the roadway. The 85th percentile speed is
considered the travel speed motorists generally perceive as reasonable for given roadway
conditions. A weakness of this approach is that it does not account for the perceptions of other road
users such as pedestrians or residents that live along a street.
To address this deficiency, a speed perception survey was conducted to gather information on how
pedestrians and other persons along sidewalks and areas near vehicle travel lanes perceive the
speed of cars. The survey responses were analyzed to develop a target speed used to assess the
striping plan and feedback sign. This target speed may be higher or lower than the posted speed
limit.
The speed perception survey was conducted on Wednesday, June 8, 2011 between 12:45 pm and
2:30 pm. Survey participants included residents from Lincoln Avenue, Glens Fall Hospital staff and
a few other volunteers. Test cars made runs on Lincoln Avenue at approximately one minute

Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study 
28 October 2011 7 
Final Report 

intervals over the course of an hour (two test cars were used). Each test run was made at a specific,
but randomly selected speed ranging between approximately 15‐40 mph. Actual test car speeds
were recorded using a radar gun. There were 100 runs completed over the course of the hour.
Survey participants recorded their perception of the speed of each test run using a scale that ranged
from +4 for very acceptable to ‐4 for very unacceptable (Figure 4).
Figure 4: Speed Perception Survey on Lincoln Avenue ‐ June 8, 2011 
Approximately 725 observations were recorded by the volunteers. The survey form is contained in
Appendix B. The results are grouped within Table 2 into the following general categories:
acceptable (scores from ‐1 to ‐4), neutral (scores of zero) and acceptable (scores from +1 to +4).
The results in Table 2 suggest that:
 Survey participants are nearly unanimous that driving speeds of less than 25 mph on Lincoln
Avenue are acceptable.
 A small majority (60%) of survey participants consider driving speeds of 25‐30 mph on Lincoln
Avenue to be acceptable.
 More than two‐thirds (69%) of survey participants consider driving speeds of 30 mph or greater
to be unacceptable.
 Survey participants are nearly unanimous that driving speeds of 35 mph or greater on Lincoln
Avenue are unacceptable.
Figure 5 shows the results of a statistical analysis of the survey participants’ acceptability ratings.
The sloped line reflects the combined average rating of all of the survey participants for different
speeds. It indicates that 28 mph (which corresponds with the point at which the sloped line crosses
the neutral acceptability/zero line) is the maximum speed that would be acceptable, on average, for
pedestrians and residents along Lincoln Avenue. Speeds of greater than 28 mph are considered
unacceptable, on average, by pedestrians and residents along Lincoln Avenue. Given that speeds are
posted in 5 mph increments, 25 mph would be the recommended posted speed limit to satisfy the
perceptions of non‐auto roadway users.

Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study 
8  28 October 2011 
Final Report 
Table 2: Summary of Speed Perception Survey Results 
 
Figure 5: Regression Analysis of Speed Perception Survey Results 
 
Speed 
Category Data De script ionNot 
Acceptable Neutral Acceptable Totals
Count12 5 84 101
Percent within Ca tegory12% 5% 83% 100%
Count73130140
Percent within Ca tegory5% 2% 93% 100%
Count34 35 102 171
Percent within Ca tegory20% 20% 60% 100%
Count123 24 30 177
Percent within Ca tegory69% 14% 17% 100%
Count113 2 4 119
Percent within Ca tegory95% 2% 3% 100%
Count15 0 1 16
Percent within Ca tegory94% 0% 6% 100%
Count304 69 351 724
Percent within Ca tegory42% 10% 48% 100% Tota l s15‐19
20‐24
25‐29
30‐34
35‐34
35‐40
‐10‐50
5 10
10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 Accept abilit y Score
Spee d 
(Miles per Hour )
Acceptable
Not
Acceptable

Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study 
28 October 2011 9 
Final Report 

4. DEMONSTRATION PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION AND RESULTS 
The purpose of the demonstration project was to determine if the low cost and relatively easy to
implement traffic calming strategies represented by the striping plan could help reduce existing
speeds to the residents’ target of 28 miles per hour. Traffic count and speed data were collected
under existing conditions and during deployment of the striping and speed feedback sign.
The demonstration project had the following phases:
 Phase I‐Existing Conditions Pre‐Test (July 11‐July 21, 2011). Traffic count and speed data
were collected during this period to establish a baseline for comparison purposes. Typical
roadway conditions existed during this period.
 Phase II ‐ Striping Only (July 28‐August 3, 2011): Temporary striping was installed on
Lincoln Avenue to delineate on‐street parking, define the edge of the travel lane, stop bars
to emphasize stop signs, and cross‐walks (Figure 6, Figure 7). The striping plans are
contained in Appendix A. The striping was installed on Wednesday, July 27, 2011. The test
period during which data are summarized started the following day.
 Phase III ‐ Striping plus Speed Feedback Sign
(August 4‐August 10, 2011): A portable
speed feedback sign was installed on Wednesday, August 3, 2011 (Figure 8). The test period
during which data are summarized started the following day.
Traffic count and speed data were collected during these three phases and are contained in
Appendix C. In addition, a questionnaire was distributed to residents to gather their opinions on the
effectiveness and other aspects of the demonstration test. Results are summarized below.
Figure 6: Temporary Striping Delineates Parking and Travel Lane Edge 
 
Tubes from ATR collect traffic
volume and speed data

Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study 
10  28 October 2011 
Final Report 
Figure 7: Temporary Striping Plan: Stop Bars and Parking at the Crandall Street Intersection 
 
Figure 8: Portable Radar Speed Feedback Sign Installed on Lincoln Avenue 
 
4.1 Traffic Speeds 
Automatic traffic recorders (ATR) were used to collect traffic count and speed data for the three
analysis periods. ATRs collect data continuously while they are in place and provide a reliable
measure of traffic counts and speeds by hour and day. The percentage of vehicles travelling over 30

Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study 
28 October 2011 11 
Final Report 

miles per hour increased slightly on Lincoln Avenue while the striping was in place and then
decreased when the speed feedback sign was installed (Table 3). In general, the striping appears to
be associated with a shift from lower to higher speed categories. In contrast, the speed feedback
sign was effective at reducing speeds (Figure 9). It should be noted that the speed feedback sign
was not deployed without the striping; its effectiveness in lowering speeds beyond the existing
condition was not studied as a part of this plan.
Table 3: Lincoln Avenue Observed Speeds versus Posted Speed 
 
Figure 9: Speed Data on Lincoln Avenue 
 
As previously noted, the 85th percentile speed is the typical indicator used by engineers when
determining a safe and reasonable posted speed limit. Under existing conditions, the 85
th percentile
speed of vehicles travelling on Lincoln Avenue of 31 mph, which is close to the 30 mph posted
Under 30 
mphOver 30 
mph
Before striping 81% 19%
Wi th striping  in pl ace 79% 21%
Striping plus Radar Feedback Si gn 86% 14%Percentage of 
vehicles traveling:
Scenario
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%
< 15 16 ‐20 21 ‐25 26 ‐30 31 ‐35 36 ‐40 Percent of  Vehicles  in Speed Range Speed Range s (miles per hour) Be fore striping With striping was in  place Striping plus Radar  Feedback Sign Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study  12  28 October 2011  Final Report  speed limit (Table 4). Thus, from a driver’s perspective, 30 mph is a reasonable speed limit for Lincoln Avenue under existing conditions. Traffic calming is used to modify roadway conditions in a manner that encourages slower speeds. However, the striping appears to be correlated with a slight increase in the 85 th percentile speed, and did not lower speeds. The combination of the speed feedback sign and the striping was effective at encouraging drivers to travel closer to the posted speed. Although the impact of the speed feedback sign alone was not studied, given that the striping was associated with a slight increase in speed, it is likely that the deployment of a speed feedback sign without the striping would result in some decrease in speed as well. Regardless of the alternative, about half of the cars travelling on Lincoln Avenue are moving faster than the residents’ preferred speed of 28 miles per hour. This observation suggests that the striping (which appears to have increased speeds) and the combination of striping with the speed feedback sign (which reduced speeds somewhat) are not effective at achieving the 28 mph target. Table 4: Lincoln Avenue Speed Data Statistics    4.2 Traffic Counts  During weekdays, traffic volumes decreased relative to the existing conditions pre‐test period on Lincoln Avenue by 8% after the striping was installed and 6% after the feedback sign was added (Table 5). During the weekends, traffic on Lincoln Avenue decreased by 10% while the striping was in place and 1% after the feedback sign was added (Table 6). If the striping and speed feedback sign on Lincoln Avenue caused traffic to divert to Horicon Avenue or Coolidge Avenue, there would have been a consistent increase in volumes on each street during the demonstration project for all time periods and demonstration project phases. However, during the demonstration project, traffic volumes both increased and decreased on these streets depending on whether the count was taken on a weekday or weekend. Therefore, the traffic volume changes on the parallel streets are probably the result of normal variations in traffic flows from week to week and cannot be conclusively attributed to traffic diverted from Lincoln Avenue. Street Pre‐Te st W ith StripingWith Striping  and Radar  Feedback Sign 85 th Percentile 31 32 30<‐‐ Typically used to determine posted speed 50th Percentile 26 27 26 Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study  28 October 2011 13  Final Report  Table 5: Change in Average Weekday Traffic Volumes    Table 6: Change in Average Weekend Traffic Volumes    4.3 Residents’ Questionnaire   Questionnaires were distributed to all households along Lincoln Avenue to gather residents’ opinions about speeding, traffic, and the effectiveness of the striping. Of the 51 questionnaires distributed, 29 were returned, which represents a 57% response rate. While the response rate was large, the questionnaire was not designed as a scientific survey that reflects the opinions of all households. Of the 29 surveys returned, 27 believe that speeding is either a significant or minor problem (Table 7), suggesting that the responders have a particular interest in this issue. Ve hi c l e s per  DayPercent  Cha ngeVe hi c l e s per  DayPercent Cha nge Li ncol n A ve nue 1, 089 1, 005‐8% 1, 026‐6% Hori con A ve nue 1, 857 1, 855 0% 1, 737‐6% Coolidge A v e nue 1, 047 1, 120 7% 1, 058 1% 1.  July 14 through July 21, 2011, data collected with ATRs installed by the Warren County DPW 2. July 28 through Au gu s t 3, 2011, data collected with ATRs installed by RSG 3. Au gu s t 5 through Au gu s t 11, 2011, data collected with ATRs installed by RSG Wi th Striping 2Vehicles per  Day Before  Te st  1 Wi th Striping & Speed  Feedback Sign  3 Street Ve hi c l e s per  DayPercent  Cha ngeVe hi c l e s per  DayPercent Cha nge Li ncol n Avenue 829 750‐10% 821‐1% Hori con A v e n u e 1, 197 1, 331 11% 1, 230 3% Coolidge Avenue 848 749‐12% 889 5% 1.  July 14 through July 21, 2011, data collected with ATRs installed by the Warren County DPW 2. July 28 through Au gu s t 3, 2011, data collected with ATRs installed by RSG 3. Au gu s t 5 through Au gu s t 11, 2011, data collected with ATRs installed by RSG StreetVehicles per  Day Before  Te st 1 Wi th Striping 2Wi th Striping & Speed  Feedback Sign  3 Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study  14  28 October 2011  Final Report  Table 7: Response to Question 1    Consistent with the ATR traffic count and speed data, most of the respondents did not perceive a change in the vehicle speeds on Lincoln Avenue while the striping was in place (Table 8). None of the respondents noticed an increase in speeds. Table 8: Responses to Question 2  Although ATR data suggest traffic volumes decreased on Lincoln Avenue during the test, respondents did not notice a change (Table 9). Unless a person counts cars over an extended period of time, it is difficult to identify small changes in traffic volumes. The fact that the respondents did not perceive a change in traffic, even though traffic did decrease by 8‐10%, suggests that these differences are within normal weekly and daily variations. Re sponse ChoicesTot als by  Re sponse Speedi n g is a significant probl em 16 Speedi n g is a mi nor probl em 11 Speedi n g is not a probl em 2 Tota l Responses 29 Question: Do you feel s peed i ng is a probl em on  Li nc o l n Av en u e? Re sponse ChoicesTot als by  Re sponse Speeds decreas ed significantly 2 Speeds decreas ed somewhat 6 Speeds wer e about the same 13 Speeds increased somewhat 0 Speeds increased significantly 0 Don’t know 8 Tota l Responses 29 Question: Di d you noti ce a change in the s peed of vehi cl es  travelling on Li n c ol n Avenu e while the tempor a r y striping  wa s in pl a ce? Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study  28 October 2011 15  Final Report  Table 9: Responses to Question 3    Respondents considered the striping to have a positive or neutral effect on parking and access to driveways. Pedestrian safety was ranked mostly positive. Written comments suggest that the cross‐ walks were the primary reason for the positive rating, rather than reduced speeds. Respondents believed that the impact on driver safety was mostly neutral. The impact on aesthetics received the most negative reaction from respondents (Table 10). Table 10: Responses to Question 4    In addition to the numerical ratings of these issues, the questionnaire invited participants to provide open‐ended comments. Themes that emerge from a review of the comments include:  Support for the crosswalks.  Concern about vehicles ignoring stop signs and support for the stop bars which reinforce the need and requirement to stop.  The striping made the street feel more commercial rather residential. Response ChoicesTot als by  Re sponse The number of cars decreas ed significantly 0 The number of cars decreas ed somewhat 0 The number of cars wa s about the same 23 The number of cars increased somewhat 0 The number of cars increased significantly 0 Don’t know 6 Tot als 29 Question: Di d you noti ce a change in the number of vehi cl es  travelling  on Li n c ol n Avenu e while the tempor a r y striping  wa s in pl a ce? IssueVery  PositiveSomewhat  Positive No Effe ctSome what  NegativeVery  NegativeDon’t  know / No  ResponseTot alsOverall  Observations  On‐street pa rki ng 4 8 13 0 0 4 29 No effec t to  pos i ti ve, no  Ability to enter and  ex i t dri veways3614 1 0529 No effec t to pos i ti ve Safety for  pedes tri ans crossing 979 1 0329Mostly pos i ti ve Safety for motor i s ts 3 3 1 5 0 0 8 2 9 Mos tl y no effec t Gener a l aesthetics of  the street335 6 7529Wi dest range of  responses, but mor e  Question: Whil e the pri mary purpos e of the tempor a r y striping wa s to enc our a ge slower speeds, it ma y have also affected  other aspects of the s tr eet. To wha t ex ten t di d the s tri pi ng affect the fol l owi ng items? Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study  16  28 October 2011  Final Report   Striping helped to manage the parking at the Glen Street end of Lincoln Avenue (which has been a point of contention in the neighborhood), but was not that effective or useful along the rest of Lincoln Avenue. Complete comments are provided in Appendix D. 5. CONCLUSIONS  The purpose of this study is to identify and evaluate the effectiveness of low cost traffic calming measures to address concerns about vehicle speed and related safety issues on residential streets in Glens Falls, New York. Lincoln Avenue was used as a case study. Input from residents and city officials has been combined with an analysis of traffic data collected during a demonstration project of two low cost traffic calming alternatives to reach the following conclusions.  The line striping alternative was not effective at reducing speeds, and even appears to have encouraged faster speeds. The longitudinal striping was tested as a low cost approach to create the perception of a narrower street. Street narrowing options such as center island narrowing and chokers have been found to reduce speeds between 7% and 14% (Table 1). Striping, however, lacks vertical elements like curbing and varying road edge conditions, which are effective at slowing traffic. These results support the findings of a dated but relevant study that evaluated the use of road markings on speeds in residential areas. That study concluded that longitudinal pavement markings combined with raised pavement markings to create the impression of a narrower street have no effect on the mean speeds or distribution of drivers on residential streets 3.  While the longitudinal striping was not effective at reducing speeds, the stop bars and cross‐ walks incorporated into the plan have other benefits. The stop bars reinforce the stop signs and could help increase stopping compliance, which is a particular concern of Lincoln Avenue residents at the Crandall Street intersection. Residents also felt that the crosswalk at Davis Street improved conditions for pedestrians.  The speed feedback sign reduced speeds slightly. The speed feedback sign includes a static sign that shows the posted speed of 30 mph. Thus, motorists were only encouraged to keep their speed at 30 mph. To address residents’ concern about speeding, additional measures will be necessary to achieve the maximum acceptable target of 28 mph. Under existing conditions, the 85 th percentile speed was measured at 31 mph, which is approximately 11% faster than residents’ preferred maximum speed. One potential solution is to implement the roadway design changes proposed in the Alternative 2. This includes a choker concept and traffic circle which have the potential to decrease speeds between 11‐14%. However, the roadway changes proposed in Alternative 2 would cost approximately $120,000 to construct. If used throughout the city to address speeding concerns, roadway design changes would have a substantial total cost. Other issues related to emergency vehicle access, snow plowing and maintenance would also need to be addressed on a city‐wide basis before proceeding. Given the potential cost, a field test should be conducted to determine if the Alternative 2 plan would reduce speeds enough to achieve the desired target of 28 mph. 3 “The Use of Road Markings to Narrow Lanes for Controlling Speed in Residential Areas”, Harry S. Lum; ITE Journal, June 1984.  Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study  28 October 2011 17  Final Report  Studies have found portable speed feedback signs are effective while deployed, but their effectiveness fades quickly once removed, particularly on streets that serve through traffic 4. Although speed feedback signs are only effective while active, permanently‐mounted signs could represent an effective, low cost option available to the city. These signs cost approximately $2,500 per installation. The speed perception survey indicates that 28 mph is the maximum acceptable speed for residents and pedestrians along Lincoln Avenue. The survey participants were nearly unanimous that a 25 mph speed is acceptable. If the perception of non‐auto users is factored into the decision about a safe and reasonable posted speed on a residential street, then 25 mph is justified. If the city is faced with continued dissatisfaction with speeding traffic, it could consider reducing the official posted speed from 30 mph to 25 mph on residential streets. In some cases, where roadway conditions encourage faster speeds, simply posting a 25 mph speed limit sign will not result in slower speeds. For these situations, traffic calming measures, including permanently‐mounted speed feedback signs, or physical changes to a roadway’s design, may be necessary to achieve slower speeds. 4 San Jose has found radar speed trailers effective only while displayed. The residual effect is negligible. Kirkland, WA, reports  that radar speed trailers, while displayed, reduce speed by 25 percent.  In the longer term (30 days after a series of  applications), speeds are reduced by 6 percent on streets with traffic volumes below 600 vehicles per day; on such streets,  most traffic is local, and radar speed trailers raise residents’ consciousness. On higher volume streets serving through traffic,  the long term  effect of radar speed trailers has been found to be negligible. http://www.ite.org/traffic/tcsop/Chapter5c.pdf    Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study  October 2011  APPENDIX A    Traffic Calming Concept Plans    LINCOLN AVE KENSINGTON RD GARFIELD ST CRANDALL ST DAVIS ST GLEN ST LINCOLN AVE 1 1 1"=40' CM JS 07/06/11 10243 STRIPING LAYOUT MATCHLINE - SEE ABOVE MATCHLINE - SEE BELOW TEMPORARY 4 INCH WHITE STRIPING TOTAL PARKING LENGTH = 3180 FEET TOTAL STOP BAR LENGTH = 24 x 3 = 72 FEET TOTAL CROSSWALK LENGTH = 40 / 3 x 8 x 3 = 312 FEET OVERALL 4" STRIPE LENGTH = 3564 FEET TEMPORARY CROSSWALK STRIPING TOTAL LENGTH = 40 FEETTEMPORARY 12" STOP BAR TOTAL LENGTH = 24 FEETNOTE: 1. TEMPORARY CROSSWALK SHALL CONSIST OF 8 FOOT LENGTHS OF 12" WIDE WHITE STRIPES SPACED 3 FEET C/C (2 FEET CLEAR). THREE ADJACENT 4" STRIPES MAY BE PLACED INSTEAD OF ONE 12" STRIPE. 2. THE 12" STOP BAR MAY BE PLACED AS THREE ADJACENT 4" STRIPES. WHEEL PATH WHEEL PATH 3 - 4" SOLID WHITE TEMPORARY TAPE STRIPE 2' 8' LINCOLN AVE KENSINGTON RD GARFIELD ST CRANDALL ST DAVIS ST GLEN ST LINCOLN AVE 2 2 1"=40' CDM J_S 06/07/11 10243 ALTERNATIVE 2 - HARDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS MATCHLINE - SEE ABOVE MATCHLINE - SEE BELOW Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study  October 2011  APPENDIX B    Speed Perception Survey    Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study  October 2011  APPENDIX C    TRAFFIC COUNT AND SPEED DATA      Lincoln Avenue During Test (Site 03)RSG CountTime Direction 1 Direction 2 TotalDirection 1 Direction 2 Total 14:45 19 12 31 Thurs 7/28/2011 494 558 1052 15:00 12 9 21 Fri 7/29/2011 467 523 990 15:15 11 18 29 Sat 7/30/2011 398 395 793 15:30 11 9 20 Sun 7/31/2011 343 364 707 15:45 6 11 17 Mon 8/1/2011 472 508 980 16:00 17 13 30 Tue 8/2/2011 463 507 970 16:15 8 15 23 Weds 8/3/2011 493 523 1016 16:30 14 13 27 Thurs 8/4/2011 512 511 1023 <-- Speed Feedback sign installed this day 16:45 12 8 20 Fri 8/5/2011 629 564 1193 17:00 18 10 28 Sat 8/6/2011 428 491 919 17:15 10 12 22 Sun 8/7/2011 326 397 723 17:30 8 12 20 Mon 8/8/2011 468 482 950 17:45 9 10 19 Tue 8/9/2011 496 508 1004 18:00 10 5 15 Weds 8/10/2011 476 503 979 18:15 4 8 12 Thurs 8/11/2011 483 523 1006 18:30 9 6 15 18:45 8 9 17 All days With StripingStriping + Radar Sign 19:00 5 4 9 Average Weekday 1015 1005 1026 19:15 10 7 17 Average Weekend 786 750 821 19:30 11 6 17 19:45 9 6 15 20:00 7 9 16 20:15 4 4 8 20:30 7 3 10 20:45 8 1 9 21:00 6 6 12 21:15 4 6 10 21:30 5 1 6 21:45 3 7 10 22:00 2 3 5 22:15 3 2 5 22:30 2 0 2 22:45 3 1 4 23:00 1 3 4 23:15 2 1 3 23:30 2 1 3 23:45 1 2 3 7/28/2011 1 1 2 494 558 1052 0:15 1 2 3 0:30 0 0 0 0:45 1 1 2 1:00 1 0 1 1:15 0 2 2 1:30 0 1 1 1:45 0 0 0 2:00 1 0 1 2:15 0 1 1 2:30 0 0 0 2:45 0 0 0 3:00 0 0 0 3:15 0 0 0 3:30 0 0 0 3:45 1 0 1 4:00 0 0 0 4:15 0 0 0 4:30 0 1 1 4:45 2 0 2 5:00 0 0 0 5:15 0 4 4 5:30 2 0 2 5:45 0 5 5 6:00 0 1 1 6:15 1 6 7 6:30 2 5 7 6:45 1 9 10 7:00 2 2 4 7:15 1 6 7 7:30 5 8 13 7:45 3 13 16 8:00 4 12 16 8:15 6 7 13 8:30 2 11 13 8:45 3 14 17 9:00 4 7 11 9:15 7 13 20 9:30 7 9 16 9:45 15 14 29 10:00 5 12 17 10:15 4 11 15 10:30 3 6 9 10:45 8 12 20 Lincoln Avenue During Test (Site 03)RSG Count11:00 11 10 21 11:15 11 8 19 11:30 6 8 14 11:45 13 10 23 12:00 10 7 17 12:15 9 8 17 12:30 14 10 24 12:45 9 11 20 13:00 4 11 15 13:15 16 8 24 13:30 6 11 17 13:45 6 8 14 14:00 11 4 15 14:15 7 8 15 14:30 6 5 11 14:45 8 14 22 15:00 11 7 18 15:15 10 1 11 15:30 16 11 27 15:45 6 7 13 16:00 8 10 18 16:15 9 10 19 16:30 8 7 15 16:45 4 15 19 17:00 14 10 24 17:15 8 9 17 17:30 15 8 23 17:45 15 15 30 18:00 9 10 19 18:15 10 8 18 18:30 4 9 13 18:45 10 9 19 19:00 6 5 11 19:15 9 5 14 19:30 4 5 9 19:45 8 5 13 20:00 5 5 10 20:15 6 7 13 20:30 10 5 15 20:45 11 11 22 21:00 5 3 8 21:15 4 3 7 21:30 4 3 7 21:45 1 4 5 22:00 6 2 8 22:15 4 1 5 22:30 5 1 6 22:45 2 3 5 23:00 1 2 3 23:15 3 1 4 23:30 0 3 3 23:45 3 1 4 7/29/2011 3 2 5 467 523 990 0:15 1 1 2 0:30 0 1 1 0:45 0 1 1 1:00 0 2 2 1:15 0 0 0 1:30 2 1 3 1:45 1 1 2 2:00 0 1 1 2:15 0 0 0 2:30 0 2 2 2:45 0 0 0 3:00 0 1 1 3:15 0 0 0 3:30 0 0 0 3:45 0 0 0 4:00 1 0 1 4:15 0 0 0 4:30 0 0 0 4:45 0 1 1 5:00 0 0 0 5:15 1 4 5 5:30 2 2 4 5:45 0 3 3 6:00 0 3 3 6:15 1 5 6 6:30 1 1 2 6:45 1 8 9 7:00 2 6 8 7:15 0 7 7 Lincoln Avenue During Test (Site 03)RSG Count7:30 1 8 9 7:45 2 6 8 8:00 3 11 14 8:15 7 4 11 8:30 8 16 24 8:45 7 12 19 9:00 4 13 17 9:15 4 11 15 9:30 4 8 12 9:45 11 10 21 10:00 8 6 14 10:15 5 3 8 10:30 9 10 19 10:45 7 10 17 11:00 7 6 13 11:15 7 6 13 11:30 2 11 13 11:45 7 6 13 12:00 11 6 17 12:15 9 12 21 12:30 12 10 22 12:45 7 12 19 13:00 12 9 21 13:15 9 7 16 13:30 7 13 20 13:45 7 12 19 14:00 7 8 15 14:15 13 10 23 14:30 7 8 15 14:45 5 5 10 15:00 12 7 19 15:15 9 7 16 15:30 12 7 19 15:45 8 9 17 16:00 11 5 16 16:15 19 15 34 16:30 8 11 19 16:45 18 8 26 17:00 18 11 29 17:15 8 4 12 17:30 7 7 14 17:45 2 6 8 18:00 6 7 13 18:15 6 9 15 18:30 5 5 10 18:45 9 6 15 19:00 7 3 10 19:15 10 11 21 19:30 2 7 9 19:45 6 7 13 20:00 6 3 9 20:15 4 3 7 20:30 5 7 12 20:45 8 7 15 21:00 5 5 10 21:15 4 5 9 21:30 2 2 4 21:45 3 1 4 22:00 1 1 2 22:15 5 5 10 22:30 1 0 1 22:45 5 4 9 23:00 2 1 3 23:15 2 3 5 23:30 4 1 5 23:45 2 1 3 7/30/2011 3 1 4 398 395 793 0:15 1 3 4 0:30 3 2 5 0:45 2 0 2 1:00 1 0 1 1:15 0 0 0 1:30 0 0 0 1:45 1 2 3 2:00 2 1 3 2:15 0 1 1 2:30 0 0 0 2:45 0 0 0 3:00 0 0 0 3:15 1 0 1 3:30 0 0 0 3:45 0 0 0 Lincoln Avenue During Test (Site 03)RSG Count4:00 0 1 1 4:15 1 0 1 4:30 0 0 0 4:45 1 1 2 5:00 1 1 2 5:15 0 0 0 5:30 1 0 1 5:45 0 0 0 6:00 0 1 1 6:15 0 1 1 6:30 2 2 4 6:45 1 2 3 7:00 5 4 9 7:15 1 1 2 7:30 1 5 6 7:45 0 6 6 8:00 0 7 7 8:15 3 7 10 8:30 8 4 12 8:45 1 8 9 9:00 2 6 8 9:15 5 8 13 9:30 5 6 11 9:45 2 10 12 10:00 3 5 8 10:15 5 7 12 10:30 6 8 14 10:45 10 7 17 11:00 10 8 18 11:15 8 5 13 11:30 8 10 18 11:45 8 3 11 12:00 7 6 13 12:15 6 6 12 12:30 6 9 15 12:45 8 9 17 13:00 5 9 14 13:15 10 6 16 13:30 10 9 19 13:45 10 4 14 14:00 10 9 19 14:15 3 2 5 14:30 13 6 19 14:45 7 6 13 15:00 8 6 14 15:15 8 6 14 15:30 11 6 17 15:45 3 8 11 16:00 3 6 9 16:15 10 6 16 16:30 5 6 11 16:45 10 6 16 17:00 6 9 15 17:15 5 7 12 17:30 8 6 14 17:45 10 5 15 18:00 12 5 17 18:15 5 6 11 18:30 6 8 14 18:45 5 7 12 19:00 4 5 9 19:15 8 7 15 19:30 4 5 9 19:45 0 6 6 20:00 8 5 13 20:15 5 1 6 20:30 4 2 6 20:45 3 9 12 21:00 3 1 4 21:15 4 4 8 21:30 8 4 12 21:45 7 4 11 22:00 6 4 10 22:15 1 1 2 22:30 2 1 3 22:45 0 1 1 23:00 3 4 7 23:15 4 1 5 23:30 1 1 2 23:45 1 1 2 7/31/2011 0 2 2 343 364 707 0:15 3 3 6 Lincoln Avenue During Test (Site 03)RSG Count0:30 3 2 5 0:45 2 0 2 1:00 1 0 1 1:15 2 0 2 1:30 1 0 1 1:45 0 0 0 2:00 1 0 1 2:15 0 0 0 2:30 0 0 0 2:45 0 1 1 3:00 0 0 0 3:15 0 0 0 3:30 0 0 0 3:45 0 0 0 4:00 0 0 0 4:15 1 0 1 4:30 0 0 0 4:45 0 0 0 5:00 0 1 1 5:15 0 1 1 5:30 1 0 1 5:45 0 1 1 6:00 0 0 0 6:15 0 0 0 6:30 0 0 0 6:45 1 1 2 7:00 0 3 3 7:15 2 1 3 7:30 2 7 9 7:45 2 4 6 8:00 0 0 0 8:15 0 1 1 8:30 3 6 9 8:45 4 8 12 9:00 4 4 8 9:15 0 6 6 9:30 1 7 8 9:45 11 9 20 10:00 7 7 14 10:15 6 7 13 10:30 9 6 15 10:45 3 8 11 11:00 6 3 9 11:15 8 10 18 11:30 5 4 9 11:45 7 11 18 12:00 6 11 17 12:15 8 8 16 12:30 5 7 12 12:45 6 7 13 13:00 7 7 14 13:15 6 9 15 13:30 6 6 12 13:45 4 8 12 14:00 6 4 10 14:15 6 3 9 14:30 6 6 12 14:45 4 4 8 15:00 6 7 13 15:15 5 3 8 15:30 4 7 11 15:45 10 7 17 16:00 9 7 16 16:15 5 7 12 16:30 4 3 7 16:45 9 7 16 17:00 8 6 14 17:15 8 4 12 17:30 5 5 10 17:45 2 5 7 18:00 6 6 12 18:15 7 2 9 18:30 5 4 9 18:45 7 7 14 19:00 3 9 12 19:15 3 6 9 19:30 9 3 12 19:45 4 7 11 20:00 7 5 12 20:15 7 7 14 20:30 8 1 9 20:45 5 3 8 Lincoln Avenue During Test (Site 03)RSG Count21:00 5 5 10 21:15 5 2 7 21:30 3 4 7 21:45 4 3 7 22:00 3 2 5 22:15 0 3 3 22:30 3 5 8 22:45 2 2 4 23:00 2 4 6 23:15 1 0 1 23:30 1 1 2 23:45 2 1 3 8/1/2011 1 1 2 472 508 980 0:15 0 1 1 0:30 1 0 1 0:45 0 1 1 1:00 0 1 1 1:15 0 0 0 1:30 0 0 0 1:45 0 0 0 2:00 0 1 1 2:15 1 0 1 2:30 0 0 0 2:45 0 0 0 3:00 0 0 0 3:15 0 0 0 3:30 1 0 1 3:45 0 0 0 4:00 0 0 0 4:15 0 0 0 4:30 0 0 0 4:45 0 1 1 5:00 0 1 1 5:15 1 5 6 5:30 0 2 2 5:45 1 4 5 6:00 1 0 1 6:15 1 2 3 6:30 1 6 7 6:45 2 7 9 7:00 3 8 11 7:15 1 12 13 7:30 2 7 9 7:45 9 8 17 8:00 5 11 16 8:15 4 14 18 8:30 4 8 12 8:45 5 9 14 9:00 5 12 17 9:15 2 8 10 9:30 4 9 13 9:45 11 9 20 10:00 2 10 12 10:15 5 14 19 10:30 10 8 18 10:45 8 5 13 11:00 6 5 11 11:15 5 6 11 11:30 10 8 18 11:45 8 7 15 12:00 12 12 24 12:15 11 5 16 12:30 8 10 18 12:45 14 7 21 13:00 11 4 15 13:15 8 7 15 13:30 10 7 17 13:45 10 8 18 14:00 6 10 16 14:15 8 8 16 14:30 9 11 20 14:45 8 6 14 15:00 8 8 16 15:15 7 8 15 15:30 11 9 20 15:45 8 14 22 16:00 14 5 19 16:15 6 9 15 16:30 17 10 27 16:45 14 5 19 17:00 12 8 20 17:15 15 8 23 Lincoln Avenue During Test (Site 03)RSG Count17:30 8 11 19 17:45 10 5 15 18:00 13 4 17 18:15 8 5 13 18:30 9 2 11 18:45 5 7 12 19:00 6 13 19 19:15 2 7 9 19:30 9 5 14 19:45 5 12 17 20:00 11 5 16 20:15 5 4 9 20:30 2 10 12 20:45 8 2 10 21:00 3 5 8 21:15 6 3 9 21:30 2 2 4 21:45 1 1 2 22:00 3 2 5 22:15 2 4 6 22:30 0 1 1 22:45 1 1 2 23:00 3 3 6 23:15 2 4 6 23:30 1 0 1 23:45 0 0 0 8/2/2011 1 2 3 463 507 970 0:15 1 0 1 0:30 1 1 2 0:45 0 1 1 1:00 0 2 2 1:15 0 0 0 1:30 0 1 1 1:45 0 0 0 2:00 0 0 0 2:15 1 2 3 2:30 0 0 0 2:45 0 0 0 3:00 0 2 2 3:15 0 0 0 3:30 0 0 0 3:45 0 0 0 4:00 0 0 0 4:15 0 0 0 4:30 0 0 0 4:45 0 0 0 5:00 0 1 1 5:15 1 3 4 5:30 0 3 3 5:45 1 1 2 6:00 0 3 3 6:15 1 5 6 6:30 1 7 8 6:45 1 9 10 7:00 2 5 7 7:15 7 14 21 7:30 5 17 22 7:45 5 14 19 8:00 4 9 13 8:15 2 10 12 8:30 5 6 11 8:45 0 11 11 9:00 12 11 23 9:15 9 3 12 9:30 8 7 15 9:45 5 6 11 10:00 6 12 18 10:15 7 3 10 10:30 1 4 5 10:45 7 10 17 11:00 8 5 13 11:15 4 4 8 11:30 7 7 14 11:45 5 11 16 12:00 17 11 28 12:15 6 12 18 12:30 12 3 15 12:45 8 9 17 13:00 7 7 14 13:15 12 10 22 13:30 7 11 18 13:45 8 6 14 Lincoln Avenue During Test (Site 03)RSG Count14:00 7 5 12 14:15 2 13 15 14:30 9 9 18 14:45 8 10 18 15:00 10 6 16 15:15 9 6 15 15:30 11 9 20 15:45 11 10 21 16:00 7 10 17 16:15 11 9 20 16:30 10 9 19 16:45 13 13 26 17:00 16 8 24 17:15 13 5 18 17:30 11 5 16 17:45 8 11 19 18:00 7 7 14 18:15 8 8 16 18:30 7 7 14 18:45 7 9 16 19:00 7 6 13 19:15 4 6 10 19:30 2 4 6 19:45 4 2 6 20:00 6 5 11 20:15 9 3 12 20:30 11 5 16 20:45 5 5 10 21:00 6 0 6 21:15 3 1 4 21:30 4 0 4 21:45 3 2 5 22:00 2 1 3 22:15 1 3 4 22:30 5 3 8 22:45 3 4 7 23:00 2 1 3 23:15 2 2 4 23:30 2 1 3 23:45 2 3 5 8/3/2011 2 3 5 493 523 1016 0:15 2 2 4 0:30 1 1 2 0:45 0 3 3 1:00 0 1 1 1:15 0 0 0 1:30 2 1 3 1:45 0 0 0 2:00 0 0 0 2:15 0 1 1 2:30 1 0 1 2:45 1 0 1 3:00 0 0 0 3:15 0 0 0 3:30 0 0 0 3:45 0 0 0 4:00 0 0 0 4:15 0 0 0 4:30 0 1 1 4:45 1 1 2 5:00 0 0 0 5:15 0 0 0 5:30 0 2 2 5:45 0 2 2 6:00 1 1 2 6:15 1 1 2 6:30 1 5 6 6:45 0 8 8 7:00 3 7 10 7:15 1 8 9 7:30 2 8 10 7:45 7 13 20 8:00 7 10 17 8:15 7 9 16 8:30 1 8 9 8:45 4 10 14 9:00 6 9 15 9:15 4 7 11 9:30 7 6 13 9:45 9 12 21 10:00 6 12 18 10:15 4 10 14 Lincoln Avenue During Test (Site 03)RSG Count10:30 3 10 13 10:45 7 8 15 11:00 8 6 14 11:15 3 4 7 11:30 9 11 20 11:45 9 10 19 12:00 9 8 17 12:15 5 11 16 12:30 11 15 26 12:45 8 10 18 13:00 12 5 17 13:15 8 3 11 13:30 7 10 17 13:45 6 9 15 14:00 8 11 19 14:15 7 16 23 14:30 10 7 17 14:45 11 10 21 15:00 12 7 19 15:15 18 7 25 15:30 7 8 15 15:45 7 8 15 16:00 9 12 21 16:15 14 14 28 16:30 18 6 24 16:45 17 11 28 17:00 18 6 24 17:15 6 7 13 17:30 17 10 27 17:45 3 8 11 18:00 11 5 16 18:15 7 6 13 18:30 11 7 18 18:45 11 6 17 19:00 8 5 13 19:15 9 9 18 19:30 10 8 18 19:45 5 5 10 20:00 8 2 10 20:15 4 2 6 20:30 4 8 12 20:45 5 1 6 21:00 6 3 9 21:15 3 6 9 21:30 3 3 6 21:45 5 3 8 22:00 0 1 1 22:15 2 2 4 22:30 3 2 5 22:45 1 1 2 23:00 1 1 2 23:15 2 3 5 23:30 3 1 4 23:45 3 3 6 8/4/2011 1 1 2 512 511 1023 0:15 1 0 1 0:30 0 3 3 0:45 1 0 1 1:00 2 0 2 1:15 0 0 0 1:30 2 2 4 1:45 0 2 2 2:00 0 0 0 2:15 0 0 0 2:30 0 0 0 2:45 0 0 0 3:00 0 0 0 3:15 0 0 0 3:30 0 0 0 3:45 0 1 1 4:00 0 0 0 4:15 0 0 0 4:30 0 0 0 4:45 1 1 2 5:00 0 1 1 5:15 0 1 1 5:30 0 3 3 5:45 0 2 2 6:00 2 0 2 6:15 3 2 5 6:30 1 3 4 6:45 1 6 7 Lincoln Avenue During Test (Site 03)RSG Count7:00 3 7 10 7:15 7 12 19 7:30 2 14 16 7:45 9 9 18 8:00 5 7 12 8:15 2 7 9 8:30 6 9 15 8:45 6 13 19 9:00 8 7 15 9:15 4 11 15 9:30 9 5 14 9:45 9 11 20 10:00 5 8 13 10:15 8 8 16 10:30 6 9 15 10:45 3 3 6 11:00 9 9 18 11:15 4 6 10 11:30 11 9 20 11:45 8 11 19 12:00 14 12 26 12:15 9 10 19 12:30 16 9 25 12:45 6 7 13 13:00 15 8 23 13:15 4 10 14 13:30 8 15 23 13:45 9 9 18 14:00 10 6 16 14:15 11 5 16 14:30 6 9 15 14:45 17 7 24 15:00 10 6 16 15:15 16 9 25 15:30 9 13 22 15:45 12 11 23 16:00 12 8 20 16:15 9 7 16 16:30 6 7 13 16:45 9 7 16 17:00 19 5 24 17:15 13 13 26 17:30 11 13 24 17:45 6 10 16 18:00 14 5 19 18:15 3 8 11 18:30 6 5 11 18:45 9 5 14 19:00 12 6 18 19:15 1 6 7 19:30 5 7 12 19:45 3 5 8 20:00 4 6 10 20:15 4 6 10 20:30 7 2 9 20:45 7 4 11 21:00 5 4 9 21:15 2 2 4 21:30 4 4 8 21:45 6 3 9 22:00 5 2 7 22:15 4 3 7 22:30 1 0 1 22:45 2 0 2 23:00 3 3 6 23:15 3 3 6 23:30 6 2 8 23:45 0 1 1 8/5/2011 1 1 2 629 564 1193 0:15 2 5 7 0:30 0 2 2 0:45 0 2 2 1:00 0 3 3 1:15 2 1 3 1:30 0 1 1 1:45 0 0 0 2:00 0 1 1 2:15 2 0 2 2:30 0 0 0 2:45 1 1 2 3:00 0 0 0 3:15 0 0 0 Lincoln Avenue During Test (Site 03)RSG Count3:30 0 0 0 3:45 0 0 0 4:00 0 0 0 4:15 0 0 0 4:30 1 1 2 4:45 1 0 1 5:00 0 1 1 5:15 0 0 0 5:30 0 3 3 5:45 0 2 2 6:00 1 1 2 6:15 1 3 4 6:30 2 6 8 6:45 6 7 13 7:00 4 5 9 7:15 2 3 5 7:30 2 13 15 7:45 7 13 20 8:00 10 12 22 8:15 18 13 31 8:30 8 10 18 8:45 13 12 25 9:00 12 10 22 9:15 15 11 26 9:30 11 4 15 9:45 10 11 21 10:00 10 12 22 10:15 11 12 23 10:30 9 9 18 10:45 13 11 24 11:00 9 14 23 11:15 11 12 23 11:30 18 10 28 11:45 11 9 20 12:00 16 15 31 12:15 10 7 17 12:30 10 7 17 12:45 11 13 24 13:00 17 12 29 13:15 12 8 20 13:30 14 7 21 13:45 11 8 19 14:00 9 5 14 14:15 13 7 20 14:30 5 9 14 14:45 8 8 16 15:00 15 13 28 15:15 13 9 22 15:30 10 9 19 15:45 12 8 20 16:00 15 13 28 16:15 15 10 25 16:30 9 9 18 16:45 14 15 29 17:00 12 9 21 17:15 8 8 16 17:30 16 8 24 17:45 13 10 23 18:00 7 5 12 18:15 5 8 13 18:30 12 8 20 18:45 10 11 21 19:00 8 4 12 19:15 8 2 10 19:30 7 5 12 19:45 3 4 7 20:00 5 8 13 20:15 4 11 15 20:30 4 3 7 20:45 8 2 10 21:00 6 1 7 21:15 6 3 9 21:30 3 2 5 21:45 1 0 1 22:00 2 0 2 22:15 5 4 9 22:30 4 3 7 22:45 0 1 1 23:00 5 2 7 23:15 0 1 1 23:30 3 1 4 23:45 1 1 2 Lincoln Avenue During Test (Site 03)RSG Count8/6/2011 1 1 2 428 491 919 0:15 1 2 3 0:30 0 2 2 0:45 0 0 0 1:00 0 2 2 1:15 0 1 1 1:30 0 1 1 1:45 0 0 0 2:00 0 0 0 2:15 0 0 0 2:30 0 0 0 2:45 2 0 2 3:00 0 0 0 3:15 0 0 0 3:30 1 1 2 3:45 1 0 1 4:00 0 0 0 4:15 0 1 1 4:30 0 1 1 4:45 0 1 1 5:00 0 0 0 5:15 0 0 0 5:30 0 2 2 5:45 0 1 1 6:00 0 2 2 6:15 0 1 1 6:30 1 1 2 6:45 1 4 5 7:00 2 2 4 7:15 0 3 3 7:30 1 1 2 7:45 7 7 14 8:00 1 9 10 8:15 6 15 21 8:30 4 7 11 8:45 3 6 9 9:00 11 11 22 9:15 5 11 16 9:30 6 4 10 9:45 5 8 13 10:00 8 13 21 10:15 17 12 29 10:30 8 10 18 10:45 9 17 26 11:00 9 11 20 11:15 7 7 14 11:30 11 13 24 11:45 11 10 21 12:00 9 4 13 12:15 11 14 25 12:30 4 9 13 12:45 3 9 12 13:00 9 9 18 13:15 6 11 17 13:30 6 8 14 13:45 5 4 9 14:00 12 7 19 14:15 6 8 14 14:30 16 6 22 14:45 8 12 20 15:00 8 7 15 15:15 16 13 29 15:30 11 8 19 15:45 9 10 19 16:00 7 14 21 16:15 8 3 11 16:30 13 8 21 16:45 7 11 18 17:00 9 14 23 17:15 7 6 13 17:30 7 5 12 17:45 5 4 9 18:00 8 7 15 18:15 7 5 12 18:30 3 7 10 18:45 3 3 6 19:00 10 8 18 19:15 2 1 3 19:30 7 4 11 19:45 4 6 10 20:00 4 4 8 20:15 2 5 7 Lincoln Avenue During Test (Site 03)RSG Count20:30 5 2 7 20:45 2 2 4 21:00 1 2 3 21:15 3 5 8 21:30 2 1 3 21:45 2 4 6 22:00 4 6 10 22:15 4 3 7 22:30 1 0 1 22:45 0 2 2 23:00 2 2 4 23:15 3 2 5 23:30 5 3 8 23:45 3 2 5 8/7/2011 4 1 5 326 397 723 0:15 0 0 0 0:30 1 1 2 0:45 1 1 2 1:00 2 1 3 1:15 0 0 0 1:30 1 2 3 1:45 0 0 0 2:00 3 1 4 2:15 0 2 2 2:30 0 0 0 2:45 0 0 0 3:00 0 0 0 3:15 1 0 1 3:30 0 0 0 3:45 0 1 1 4:00 0 0 0 4:15 0 0 0 4:30 0 1 1 4:45 1 1 2 5:00 0 0 0 5:15 0 1 1 5:30 0 2 2 5:45 1 2 3 6:00 1 0 1 6:15 0 0 0 6:30 0 2 2 6:45 1 6 7 7:00 1 3 4 7:15 1 4 5 7:30 2 2 4 7:45 1 0 1 8:00 0 5 5 8:15 2 4 6 8:30 1 4 5 8:45 5 7 12 9:00 3 4 7 9:15 1 3 4 9:30 1 9 10 9:45 1 6 7 10:00 5 4 9 10:15 8 7 15 10:30 16 10 26 10:45 4 4 8 11:00 3 6 9 11:15 2 4 6 11:30 7 9 16 11:45 4 5 9 12:00 3 6 9 12:15 4 7 11 12:30 10 10 20 12:45 6 6 12 13:00 8 6 14 13:15 7 13 20 13:30 9 11 20 13:45 6 10 16 14:00 11 9 20 14:15 4 9 13 14:30 5 8 13 14:45 10 9 19 15:00 8 10 18 15:15 4 4 8 15:30 6 9 15 15:45 4 6 10 16:00 4 6 10 16:15 9 9 18 16:30 11 9 20 16:45 8 3 11 Lincoln Avenue During Test (Site 03)RSG Count17:00 8 6 14 17:15 8 4 12 17:30 5 4 9 17:45 8 6 14 18:00 8 4 12 18:15 1 6 7 18:30 5 8 13 18:45 5 7 12 19:00 9 4 13 19:15 3 3 6 19:30 3 7 10 19:45 0 12 12 20:00 7 3 10 20:15 3 4 7 20:30 2 2 4 20:45 6 4 10 21:00 3 2 5 21:15 5 4 9 21:30 5 4 9 21:45 2 2 4 22:00 2 2 4 22:15 0 4 4 22:30 1 1 2 22:45 1 2 3 23:00 0 0 0 23:15 1 2 3 23:30 2 3 5 23:45 1 2 3 8/8/2011 2 1 3 468 482 950 0:15 0 0 0 0:30 0 2 2 0:45 0 0 0 1:00 0 0 0 1:15 1 2 3 1:30 0 0 0 1:45 0 0 0 2:00 0 0 0 2:15 0 0 0 2:30 0 0 0 2:45 2 1 3 3:00 0 0 0 3:15 0 0 0 3:30 0 2 2 3:45 0 0 0 4:00 1 1 2 4:15 0 0 0 4:30 0 0 0 4:45 1 2 3 5:00 0 0 0 5:15 0 4 4 5:30 0 2 2 5:45 1 1 2 6:00 1 4 5 6:15 4 3 7 6:30 1 3 4 6:45 5 4 9 7:00 4 3 7 7:15 1 6 7 7:30 4 8 12 7:45 2 17 19 8:00 5 6 11 8:15 7 6 13 8:30 4 7 11 8:45 4 13 17 9:00 2 8 10 9:15 11 7 18 9:30 1 8 9 9:45 6 8 14 10:00 3 8 11 10:15 11 9 20 10:30 10 8 18 10:45 5 7 12 11:00 9 12 21 11:15 7 11 18 11:30 10 6 16 11:45 14 5 19 12:00 3 9 12 12:15 11 16 27 12:30 15 7 22 12:45 10 7 17 13:00 12 9 21 13:15 10 8 18 Lincoln Avenue During Test (Site 03)RSG Count13:30 8 8 16 13:45 6 9 15 14:00 4 4 8 14:15 14 10 24 14:30 8 9 17 14:45 4 10 14 15:00 11 11 22 15:15 9 7 16 15:30 8 4 12 15:45 3 7 10 16:00 11 12 23 16:15 14 12 26 16:30 12 11 23 16:45 9 9 18 17:00 13 7 20 17:15 14 8 22 17:30 19 10 29 17:45 6 3 9 18:00 11 4 15 18:15 6 8 14 18:30 3 10 13 18:45 4 3 7 19:00 10 4 14 19:15 3 8 11 19:30 4 8 12 19:45 11 5 16 20:00 2 4 6 20:15 3 7 10 20:30 6 2 8 20:45 4 1 5 21:00 8 2 10 21:15 4 5 9 21:30 1 1 2 21:45 2 0 2 22:00 1 0 1 22:15 5 1 6 22:30 0 2 2 22:45 1 0 1 23:00 3 0 3 23:15 1 2 3 23:30 2 3 5 23:45 0 0 0 8/9/2011 0 2 2 496 508 1004 0:15 1 1 2 0:30 0 3 3 0:45 0 2 2 1:00 0 1 1 1:15 0 0 0 1:30 0 0 0 1:45 0 0 0 2:00 0 0 0 2:15 0 1 1 2:30 1 0 1 2:45 1 0 1 3:00 0 0 0 3:15 0 0 0 3:30 0 0 0 3:45 0 0 0 4:00 1 0 1 4:15 0 1 1 4:30 0 0 0 4:45 0 0 0 5:00 0 0 0 5:15 0 5 5 5:30 0 1 1 5:45 2 1 3 6:00 1 2 3 6:15 1 2 3 6:30 3 1 4 6:45 2 8 10 7:00 1 4 5 7:15 1 8 9 7:30 3 13 16 7:45 9 15 24 8:00 8 7 15 8:15 7 12 19 8:30 6 10 16 8:45 8 12 20 9:00 6 15 21 9:15 7 9 16 9:30 6 9 15 9:45 5 7 12 Lincoln Avenue During Test (Site 03)RSG Count10:00 6 6 12 10:15 10 11 21 10:30 6 5 11 10:45 5 8 13 11:00 7 5 12 11:15 16 5 21 11:30 15 9 24 11:45 7 9 16 12:00 8 8 16 12:15 10 10 20 12:30 8 8 16 12:45 6 9 15 13:00 16 11 27 13:15 5 10 15 13:30 10 9 19 13:45 7 9 16 14:00 8 13 21 14:15 13 10 23 14:30 9 7 16 14:45 15 6 21 15:00 12 11 23 15:15 7 12 19 15:30 10 7 17 15:45 16 8 24 16:00 7 11 18 16:15 9 8 17 16:30 6 3 9 16:45 11 9 20 17:00 18 9 27 17:15 13 5 18 17:30 10 7 17 17:45 10 8 18 18:00 5 4 9 18:15 10 9 19 18:30 5 7 12 18:45 7 4 11 19:00 6 7 13 19:15 10 3 13 19:30 3 2 5 19:45 12 4 16 20:00 4 5 9 20:15 4 5 9 20:30 6 3 9 20:45 3 4 7 21:00 3 5 8 21:15 1 2 3 21:30 2 5 7 21:45 3 2 5 22:00 2 1 3 22:15 4 4 8 22:30 1 2 3 22:45 3 1 4 23:00 2 7 9 23:15 0 3 3 23:30 0 0 0 23:45 4 1 5 8/10/2011 0 1 1 476 503 979 0:15 0 2 2 0:30 1 2 3 0:45 0 0 0 1:00 1 0 1 1:15 0 0 0 1:30 1 1 2 1:45 0 0 0 2:00 0 0 0 2:15 0 0 0 2:30 0 0 0 2:45 0 1 1 3:00 0 0 0 3:15 0 0 0 3:30 0 0 0 3:45 0 0 0 4:00 0 0 0 4:15 3 1 4 4:30 0 1 1 4:45 1 2 3 5:00 0 0 0 5:15 0 0 0 5:30 0 2 2 5:45 1 3 4 6:00 1 1 2 6:15 1 2 3 Lincoln Avenue During Test (Site 03)RSG Count6:30 0 3 3 6:45 0 5 5 7:00 5 7 12 7:15 0 12 12 7:30 4 13 17 7:45 6 15 21 8:00 3 7 10 8:15 5 13 18 8:30 7 9 16 8:45 7 7 14 9:00 7 7 14 9:15 5 9 14 9:30 4 8 12 9:45 8 4 12 10:00 9 10 19 10:15 10 10 20 10:30 7 6 13 10:45 8 14 22 11:00 2 7 9 11:15 4 6 10 11:30 5 5 10 11:45 8 10 18 12:00 16 13 29 12:15 10 10 20 12:30 6 6 12 12:45 11 9 20 13:00 11 8 19 13:15 7 5 12 13:30 5 8 13 13:45 13 10 23 14:00 4 8 12 14:15 9 14 23 14:30 8 8 16 14:45 10 7 17 15:00 12 11 23 15:15 9 9 18 15:30 11 5 16 15:45 7 5 12 16:00 8 9 17 16:15 15 7 22 16:30 9 10 19 16:45 14 7 21 17:00 19 8 27 17:15 7 5 12 17:30 11 6 17 17:45 14 9 23 18:00 3 8 11 18:15 8 7 15 18:30 4 11 15 18:45 7 3 10 19:00 13 5 18 19:15 6 5 11 19:30 6 6 12 19:45 8 6 14 20:00 8 10 18 20:15 3 7 10 20:30 3 3 6 20:45 1 3 4 21:00 5 4 9 21:15 4 2 6 21:30 6 0 6 21:45 5 2 7 22:00 3 2 5 22:15 4 7 11 22:30 0 1 1 22:45 4 2 6 23:00 1 3 4 23:15 1 2 3 23:30 1 0 1 23:45 2 1 3 8/11/2011 0 0 0 483 523 1006 0:15 1 4 5 0:30 1 3 4 0:45 0 1 1 1:00 2 1 3 1:15 1 1 2 1:30 1 1 2 1:45 0 0 0 2:00 0 0 0 2:15 0 0 0 2:30 0 0 0 2:45 1 0 1 Lincoln Avenue During Test (Site 03)RSG Count3:00 0 0 0 3:15 0 1 1 3:30 1 1 2 3:45 0 0 0 4:00 1 2 3 4:15 0 0 0 4:30 0 0 0 4:45 0 1 1 5:00 0 1 1 5:15 0 5 5 5:30 0 1 1 5:45 1 2 3 6:00 2 1 3 6:15 1 3 4 6:30 1 1 2 6:45 2 5 7 7:00 1 6 7 7:15 2 13 15 7:30 7 7 14 7:45 3 8 11 8:00 3 10 13 8:15 6 8 14 8:30 3 10 13 8:45 3 12 15 9:00 5 6 11 9:15 10 9 19 9:30 6 7 13 9:45 5 4 9 10:00 5 6 11 10:15 5 12 17 10:30 6 6 12 10:45 4 11 15 11:00 7 7 14 11:15 9 8 17 11:30 6 6 12 11:45 10 12 22 12:00 4 5 9 12:15 6 11 17 12:30 9 9 18 12:45 5 13 18 13:00 11 11 22 13:15 7 7 14 13:30 9 7 16 13:45 7 7 14 14:00 12 5 17 14:15 6 10 16 14:30 10 5 15 14:45 6 7 13 15:00 6 7 13 15:15 10 3 13 15:30 10 7 17 15:45 11 12 23 16:00 11 14 25 16:15 12 6 18 16:30 7 5 12 16:45 11 10 21 17:00 14 7 21 17:15 7 8 15 17:30 12 12 24 17:45 12 11 23 18:00 16 8 24 18:15 15 7 22 18:30 6 6 12 18:45 9 15 24 19:00 6 6 12 19:15 9 6 15 19:30 13 11 24 19:45 8 6 14 20:00 4 7 11 20:15 8 1 9 20:30 7 6 13 20:45 6 0 6 21:00 5 5 10 21:15 8 2 10 21:30 3 4 7 21:45 3 2 5 22:00 3 4 7 22:15 5 5 10 22:30 3 1 4 22:45 2 5 7 23:00 3 4 7 23:15 0 4 4 Lincoln Avenue During Test (Site 03)RSG Count23:30 2 2 4 23:45 2 4 6 8/12/2011 0 1 1 146 247 393 0:15 2 4 6 0:30 1 0 1 0:45 1 0 1 1:00 0 1 1 1:15 0 1 1 1:30 0 0 0 1:45 1 1 2 2:00 0 0 0 2:15 0 0 0 2:30 0 0 0 2:45 1 0 1 3:00 0 1 1 3:15 0 0 0 3:30 1 0 1 3:45 0 0 0 4:00 0 0 0 4:15 0 0 0 4:30 1 1 2 4:45 1 1 2 5:00 0 0 0 5:15 0 0 0 5:30 0 1 1 5:45 0 2 2 6:00 1 1 2 6:15 1 4 5 6:30 0 3 3 6:45 2 3 5 7:00 2 9 11 7:15 2 5 7 7:30 7 11 18 7:45 3 11 14 8:00 4 7 11 8:15 4 6 10 8:30 1 13 14 8:45 6 11 17 9:00 4 10 14 9:15 13 13 26 9:30 7 12 19 9:45 9 10 19 10:00 3 9 12 10:15 6 12 18 10:30 10 10 20 10:45 8 9 17 11:00 11 15 26 11:15 6 9 15 11:30 6 5 11 11:45 6 7 13 12:00 6 9 15 12:15 8 13 21 12:30 1 6 7 Lincoln Avenue During Test Eastbound DirectionRSG Count Time15-Jan16 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total15:008518961000000004716:00104141551000000004917:0045616121000000004418:002261530000000002819:000231431000000002320:00027521000000001721:00008840000000002022:0000330000000000623:001013200000000077/28/20110003100000000041:000201000000000032:000001000000000013:000000000000000004:000000010000000015:001026000000000096:0002468100000000217:00027137000000000298:003271811210000000449:008414971000000004310:003391691000000004111:002771451000000003612:0042811101000000003613:0003151280000000003814:002561341000000003115:002281031000000002616:0013171092000000004217:00201018111000000004218:0012111840000000003619:00414740000000002020:002361520000000002821:00113521000000001322:0010221100000000723:001032100000000077/29/20111013000000000051:000013000000000042:000012000000000033:000001000000000014:001000000000000015:001203120000000095:001203120000000096:00100104200000000177:00017125200000000278:00736169200000000439:000192381000000004210:000251831000000002911:002361521000000002912:004191952000000004013:0034111562000000004114:005251071100000003115:000411762000000003016:0012615123000000003917:000081460000000002818:007121160000000002719:000241480000000002820:00315740000000002021:00102730000000001322:00011710000000001023:000103200000000067/30/20110104010000000061:000001100000000022:000001100000000023:000000000000000004:000100001000000025:000010000000000016:000021210000000067:0000454300000000168:00109131200000000269:001271280000000003010:001229112000000002711:004041242000000002612:002061092010000003013:0021110112100000002814:00116951000000002315:00037880000000002616:003121251000000002417:0003514500000000027 Lincoln Avenue During Test Eastbound DirectionRSG Count Time15-Jan16 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total18:002061152000000002619:001331231000000002320:00037501100000001721:00211531000000001322:0000322000000000723:001032010000000077/31/20110014200000000071:000000000000000002:000000010000000013:000000000000000004:000000000000000005:000111000000000036:000001000000000017:0001552200000000158:0010374000000000159:000081242000000002610:000281071000000002811:002271250000000002812:004241283000000003313:003191241000000003014:00021662000000001715:002071041000000002416:001461120000000002417:00216821000000002018:00117721000000001919:001171321000000002520:00117331000000001621:00124520000000001422:00014340000000001223:000006000000000068/1/20110010110000000031:000000100000000012:000001000000000013:000000000000000004:000000010000000015:0011351010000000126:0001454100000000157:00105199100000000358:00429148500000000428:00429148500000000429:003091952000000003810:0001101772000000003711:00155960000000002612:003261283000000003413:00206891000000002614:001191590000000003515:0024811122000000003916:003131281100000002917:004161452000000003218:00123651000000001819:006311980000000003720:000310620000000002121:00102431000000001122:0001232000000000823:000023020000000078/2/20110021010000000041:000011100000000032:000001100000000023:000002000000000024:000000000000000005:000103211000000086:00012144210000000247:001292511110000000508:00316195200000000369:0002101041000000002710:000251291000000002911:00225783000000002712:001361573000000003513:003471361000000003414:001361863000000003715:000091273000000003116:004381880000000004117:001111772000000002918:002391430000000003119:00216630000000001820:001258101000000018 Lincoln Avenue During Test Eastbound DirectionRSG Count Time15-Jan16 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total21:0001100100000000322:00005240000000001123:000023200000000078/3/20110324000000000091:000001100000000022:000000100000000013:000000000000000004:000001010000000025:000012100000000046:0001247100000000157:00115199100000000368:002311136200000000379:003381460000000003410:0036121351000000004011:002291332000000003112:0031191551000000004413:002141532000000002714:006591950000000004415:005371032000000003016:004591852000000004317:002251750000000003118:000371220000000002419:000471231000000002720:00144310000000001321:00005730000000001522:0010210200000000623:002230010000000088/4/20111011100000000041:001100200000000042:000000000000000003:000000100000000014:000100000000000015:000023110000000076:0000235100000000117:00207238200000000428:002112147000000000369:0010131171100000003410:001091440000000002811:0011111461100000003511:0011111461100000003512:00311012102000000003813:0043112040000000004214:00567522000000002715:0076111410000000003916:0014101400000000002917:0011171750000000004118:00249800000000002319:001171050000000002420:00216810000000001821:00142510000000001322:0001130000000000523:001062000000000098/5/201100252100000000101:001013000000000052:000101000000000023:000000000000000004:000100000000000015:000021210000000066:00003140000000000177:001310191000000000348:003616175000000000479:0032151330000000003610:0017161640000000004411:0027191322000000004512:0024151830000000004213:0027111410000000003514:003491300000000002915:007318740000000003916:0055122311000000004717:0015111341000000003518:007061450000000003219:00014811000000001520:002213600100000002421:0010122000000000622:0001340000000000823:00102200000000005 Lincoln Avenue During Test Eastbound DirectionRSG Count Time15-Jan16 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total8/6/20111021100000000051:000002200000000042:000000000000000003:000001000000000014:000010200000000035:001001100000000036:000223001000000087:0002461000000000138:001214145100000000379:0011131171000000003410:0005241670000000005211:0021181820000000004112:0003171411000000003613:0021121610000000003214:0011131530000000003315:003491390000000003816:0036101430000000003617:0010111610000000002918:00225922000000002219:00226900000000001920:00004900000000001321:00024510000000001222:00133310000000001123:000034200000000098/7/20110012000000000031:000120000000000032:000021000000000033:000001000000000014:000010010000000025:001111100000000056:000023300000000087:000017100000000098:0002693000000000209:000361021000000002210:00139731100000002511:000011931000000002412:003171440000000002913:004292230000000004014:0022141340000000003514:0022141340000000003515:0041101310000000002916:003331530000000002717:000031160000000002018:001371310000000002519:0012111200000000002620:00008311000000001321:00032610000000001222:0012402000000000923:001033000000000078/8/20110110010000000031:001001000000000022:000010000000000013:000001100000000024:001110000000000035:000132010000000076:0003353000000000147:00019204000000000348:001411115000000000329:002511940000000003110:0003151130000000003211:0053141020000000003412:0097111020000000003913:0021141070000000003414:006441630000000003315:003215720000000002916:0046151720000000004417:0020101420000000002818:00426850000000002519:003381010000000002520:00034601000000001421:0000340001000000822:0001020000000000323:000030110000000058/9/20112103200000000081:000010000000000012:00000100000000001 Lincoln Avenue During Test Eastbound DirectionRSG Count Time15-Jan16 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total3:000000000000000004:000000100000000015:000112210000000076:0001561000000000137:00525217000000000408:00591575000000000419:0033121840000000004010:002481141000000003011:002381320000000002812:0012101552000000003513:0004191060000000003914:001515960000000003615:0013201220000000003816:0032131030000000003117:001371620000000002918:000291021000000002419:00422323000000001620:00208430000000001721:00014810000000001422:0010403000000000823:0021350000000000118/10/20111022000000000051:000000010000000012:000100000000000013:000000000000000004:001001200000000045:000011111000000056:0000254000000000117:004118213000000000478:004410116100000000369:00139852000000002810:0052141612000000004011:002161450000000002812:002371781000000003813:003151273000000003114:0021101391100000003715:00636852000000003016:0061111230000000003317:00428671000000002817:00428671000000002818:001213751000000002919:003161020000000002220:00318731000000002321:0000125000000000822:00114510000000001223:000005010000000068/11/20110024200000000081:000010110000000032:000000000000000003:000011000000000024:000001011000000035:001044000000000096:0001432000000000107:001081113100000000348:001391110600000000409:002061331100000002610:000381392000000003511:001321791000000003312:002472041000000003813:001191083000000003214:003231441000000002715:0010101242000000002916:003391370000000003517:005281490000000003818:004181571000000003619:001071731000000002920:00106340000000001421:00211432000000001322:00323430000000001523:0021182000000000148/12/20111001300000000051:000003000000000032:000000000000000003:000001000000000014:000001010000000025:00001101000000003 Lincoln Avenue During Test Eastbound DirectionRSG Count Time15-Jan16 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total6:0000252200000000117:001161511200000000368:004310145100000000379:0022102542000000004510:0036121620100000004011:0015615810000000036 Lincoln Avenue During Test Westbound DirectionRSG Count Time< 1516 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total15:007616830000000004016:00113231220000000005117:0011202030000000004518:000391351000000003119:001281860000000003520:002141540000000002621:00215730000000001822:00003430000000001023:000141000000000067/28/20110002100000000031:000001000000000012:000001000000000013:000001000000000014:000200000000000025:000101000000000026:000112000000000047:0003430100000000118:0060621000000000159:0035101050000000003310:00027650000000002011:0014121590000000004112:0013131870000000004213:0011811101000000003214:006171350000000003215:006691660000000004316:001051661000000002917:00031821100000000005218:000391740000000003319:001111950000000002720:002591150000000003221:00125231000000001422:00108341000000001723:000031210000000077/29/20110110110000000041:000012000000000032:000000000000000003:000000000000000004:001000000000000015:001100100000000035:001100100000000036:000012000000000037:000014000000000058:00525112000000000259:00535910000000002310:001481141000000002911:0002101010000000002312:000242391000000003913:0034111061000000003514:006251540000000003215:006281780000000004116:0024162590000000005617:000391292000000003518:001111940000000002619:000171070000000002520:00027950000000002321:00144401000000001422:00007320000000001223:0012322000000000107/30/20110023220000000091:000000200000000022:000100100000000023:000001000000000014:000002000000000025:001000100000000026:000011100000000037:000303100000000078:0001353000000000129:00223430000000001410:000231540000000002411:005281161100000003412:00315675000000002713:00131110100000000003514:003091371000000003315:003281430000000003016:000281260000000002817:0011615600000000029 Lincoln Avenue During Test Westbound DirectionRSG Count Time< 1516 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total18:00029971000000002819:00413431000000001620:00029720000000002021:00204970000000002222:0000342000000000923:000036000000000097/31/20110005210000000081:000021010000000042:000001000000000013:000000000000000004:000010000000000015:000010000000000016:000000100000000017:000131010000000068:000151000000000079:00124621000000001610:00237940000000002511:000291041000000002612:001151440000000002513:00327920000000002314:00039811000000002215:002310910000000002516:0030101130000000002717:001051331000000002318:003251140000000002519:00017650000000001920:0004121100000000002721:00012833000000001722:0000043100000000823:000013200000000068/1/20110011000000000021:000000000000000002:000001000000000013:000010000000000014:000000000000000005:000101000000000026:000023000000000057:0002363100000000158:0011691000000000188:0011691000000000189:00317731000000002210:001141351000000002511:001341470000000002912:0012112092000000004513:0014131173000000003914:003391051000000003115:0021515110000000003416:0031202052000000005117:0013819131000000004518:0013121260100000003519:00105961000000002220:004331060000000002621:00003720000000001222:0000150000000000623:000202110000000068/2/20110011100000000031:000000000000000002:000000001000000013:000000000000000004:000000000000000005:001001000000000026:000020100000000037:0002665000000000198:0020450000000000119:000291670000000003410:00027930000000002111:000161520000000002412:0045131551000000004313:0023111250100000003414:00228950000000002615:0023121653000000004116:00221215100000000004117:00221123100000000004818:003171440000000002919:00023831000000001720:0047413210000000031 Lincoln Avenue During Test Westbound DirectionRSG Count Time< 1516 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total21:00123640000000001622:00112700000000001123:000041300000000088/3/20110103100000000051:000010010000000022:000011000000000023:000000000000000004:001000000000000015:000000000000000006:000020100000000037:00300100000000000138:0013762000000000199:003091121000000002610:00137360000000002011:002491211000000002912:0023111250000000003313:006331641000000003314:0023111541000000003615:0057151250000000004416:0089131990000000005817:001292390000000004418:0013121680000000004019:001381271000000003220:00118920000000002121:00004760000000001722:0000213000000000623:001015101000000098/4/20110110100000000031:000002200000000042:000000000000000003:000000000000000004:000100000000000015:000000000000000006:000032200000000077:00015105000000000218:0011674000000000199:002181360000000003010:00027940000000002211:000571073000000003211:000571073000000003212:00221317110000000004513:002491740000000003614:005971850000000004415:0078101831000000004716:0035141130000000003617:0003261730000000004918:003316640000000003219:00157530000000002120:00139810000000002221:00217610000000001722:00006420000000001223:0010622100000000128/5/20110002100000000031:000011000000000022:000011100000000033:000000000000000004:001010000000000025:000000000000000006:0000163000000000107:0023433000000000158:00682195000000000499:0031323531000000004810:0026161261000000004311:00518121130000000004912:0015172310000000004713:00218151450000000005414:007711820000000003515:0076181720000000005016:0059132240000000005317:00114221110000000004918:003411961000000003419:0021111020000000002620:00209820000000002121:00125710000000001622:00006320000000001123:00303210000000009 Lincoln Avenue During Test Westbound DirectionRSG Count Time< 1516 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total8/6/20111001000000000021:000000000000000002:000000020000000023:000020000000000024:000000000000000005:000000000000000006:000002000000000027:0000550000000000108:0010760000000000149:003661020000000002710:0021316740000000004211:0006131720000000003812:0015101001000000002713:001412900000000002614:0032181540000000004215:0073181510000000004416:0024141050000000003517:0002101330000000002818:00019830000000002119:001061051000000002320:00003820000000001321:0000341000000000822:0011151000000000923:0001560010000000138/7/20110015000000000061:000012000000000032:000110100000000033:000000100000000014:001000000000000015:000000100000000016:001000100000000027:000110300000000058:001141100000000089:0000150000000000610:0016101420000000003311:00005650000000001612:00007781000000002313:001351920000000003014:005291040000000003014:005291040000000003015:002221330000000002216:0014101250000000003217:004491101000000002918:00035920000000001919:00207600000000001520:00116820000000001821:00124620000000001522:0001111000000000423:001003000000000048/8/20111100000000000021:001000000000000012:000020000000000023:000000000000000004:000200000000000025:000010000000000016:0001361000000000117:0010261100000000118:00211070000000000209:00136910000000002010:001991000000000002911:0033171430000000004012:0066101340000000003913:005491521000000003614:003214830000000003015:003810820000000003116:0024221431000000004617:0027172240000000005218:003171030000000002419:0032101120000000002820:00002841000000001521:00012831000000001522:0000132100000000723:000013200000000068/9/20111000000000000011:000000000000000002:00000200000000002 Lincoln Avenue During Test Westbound DirectionRSG Count Time< 1516 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total3:000000000000000004:001000000000000015:000011000000000026:000014200000000077:0042242000000000148:00551180000000000299:000413430000000002410:00319752000000002711:00210171510000000004512:002513921000000003213:0013151450000000003814:0026132040000000004515:00610171110000000004516:002516640000000003317:0033152550000000005118:000541710000000002719:006471031000000003120:00116810000000001721:0002412000000000922:00005410000000001023:000123000000000068/10/20110000100000000011:000002000000000022:000000000000000003:000000000000000004:003000001000000045:000001000000000016:000002000000000027:0002841000000000158:0023871100000000229:00157812000000002410:003371461000000003411:00134821000000001912:0012102361000000004313:006561450000000003614:003641440000000003115:0024171330000000003916:0094111750000000004617:0003152760000000005117:0003152760000000005118:000251320000000002219:0005111340000000003320:00012930000000001521:00007661000000002022:00213311000000001123:000111200000000058/11/20110002000000000021:000012100000000042:000001000000000013:000010000000000014:001000000000000015:000001000000000016:000032010000000067:0013261000000000138:0004560000000000159:00138860000000002610:000331220000000002011:002471450000000003212:00018942000000002413:002391540100000003414:0013121260000000003415:002381383000000003716:0016141361000000004117:00431117100000000004518:00521512120000000004619:003181770000000003620:00137851000000002521:00318700000000001922:00016420000000001323:002021200000000078/12/20111001200000000041:000010000000000012:000000100000000013:000100000000000014:000010100000000025:00000000000000000 Lincoln Avenue During Test Westbound DirectionRSG Count Time< 1516 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total6:000011200000000047:0020272100000000148:0001653000000000159:007271421000000003310:002551140000000002711:003589400000000029 Coolidge Ave During Test (Site 02) RSG CountTimeDirection 1Direction 2TotalDirection 1Direction 2Total13:3010132345Thurs7/28/2011642495113713:4571219141Fri7/29/2011622501112314:00111122237Sat7/30/201146135982014:1515419333Sun7/31/201136131667714:30121022429Mon8/1/2011597498109514:4511819525Tue8/2/2011671499117015:00101020621Weds8/3/2011612513112515:15516717Thurs8/4/20116024651067<-- Speed Feedback sign installed this day15:309514813Fri8/5/2011636502113815:4515621909Sat8/6/2011627440106716:001917361005Sun8/7/201140230871016:1576131101Mon8/8/2011571432100316:3096151197Tue8/9/2011591450104116:45179261293Weds8/10/2011612424103617:001510251389Thurs8/11/2011604469107317:151192017:308715With StripingStriping + Radar Sign17:458311Average Weekday10921120105818:0011718Average Weekend81974988918:1510102018:301111218:45651119:00581319:15821019:30931219:4510112120:0016720:15951420:30831120:451151621:0051621:1554921:30831121:4544822:0022422:1562822:3023522:4520223:0021323:1520223:3021323:451017/28/201100064249511370:152350:301230:450001:000001:150001:300001:450002:001012:150112:300112:450003:001123:150003:300223:450004:000114:150224:301454:450115:002135:151125:302135:451236:001236:151236:302466:4577147:00358 Coolidge Ave During Test (Site 02) RSG Count7:15105157:30711187:451010208:00812208:15810188:30611178:45118199:00128209:1584129:30310139:45871510:00831110:15941310:301392210:451472111:0013122511:151071711:30851311:45881612:001331612:1510102012:301392212:45781513:001151613:151071713:308111913:451081814:0010122214:1515132814:301181914:451282015:001631915:1517133015:3014102415:451361916:001451916:1516132916:301492316:4516102617:001752217:151592417:301682417:45551018:001061618:151282018:308111918:45981719:0013102319:15561119:3010102019:45731020:00841220:151181920:30931220:4541521:0023521:1503321:3052721:4562822:0044822:1515622:3033622:4531423:0030323:1521323:3011223:453037/29/201100062250111230:150000:302020:450111:00000 Coolidge Ave During Test (Site 02) RSG Count1:150221:300111:453142:000002:150112:301012:450223:001013:150113:300223:450004:000114:151124:301234:450335:001125:151125:302135:452356:001126:153256:302686:4565117:001457:1578157:30910197:45710178:001418328:151012228:3095148:45912219:00119209:1567139:3076139:4511132410:00781510:15471110:309101910:457101711:00991811:15581311:305152011:45971612:001782512:1514102412:301061612:451682413:001151613:152262813:30991813:45781514:006121814:151071714:301892714:457101715:001271915:151292115:30941315:451572216:002563116:151251716:309112016:451382117:001662217:1513102317:301261817:45741118:00841218:151041418:301071718:45891719:005611 Coolidge Ave During Test (Site 02) RSG Count19:15731019:307121919:45551020:0024620:151341720:30591420:4541521:0063921:1541521:30821021:4544822:0044822:1532522:3081922:4541523:0014523:1551623:3030323:453367/30/20114374613598200:152020:300000:450001:000001:150001:301011:451122:000222:151012:300002:450003:001013:151233:300003:450114:000004:150114:300004:451015:000005:151015:301015:451126:001126:150006:301236:450007:005387:152247:303367:453698:004598:1564108:3028108:4558139:005279:1557129:3084129:451282010:007172410:15961510:301051510:45971611:00831111:1514102411:301081811:451261812:0044812:15571212:30971612:45971613:008917 Coolidge Ave During Test (Site 02) RSG Count13:15961513:301081813:451001014:00871514:151121314:301181914:45731015:00791615:15591415:30651115:45471116:001031316:15861416:30661216:45831117:00841217:15651117:301171817:45581318:00861418:1581918:30831118:45471119:0053819:15641019:3033619:4581920:0034720:1544820:30851320:4562821:00751221:1563921:30561121:45481222:0014522:15561122:3022422:4571823:0040423:1542623:3021323:452247/31/20111123613166770:152020:300000:450111:000111:152131:300001:450002:000002:150112:300002:450003:000003:150113:300003:450004:000004:150004:301014:450115:001015:150225:300115:453036:000116:150006:303146:450117:00268 Coolidge Ave During Test (Site 02) RSG Count7:151347:301457:451458:003478:152248:3028108:452579:006399:152469:302359:45941310:00671310:15831110:30571210:456101611:00671311:151492311:30781511:45731012:00931212:151171812:30371012:45741113:00661213:15571213:30861413:45931214:0034714:1554914:3026814:45651115:00651115:15571215:30951415:45371016:0034716:15461016:30731016:4511112217:00731017:1554917:30741117:45851318:0072918:1554918:30671318:45461019:0023519:15761319:3042619:45651120:0063920:151161720:3043720:45911021:00551021:1543721:30731021:4552722:0042622:1500022:3022422:4533623:0002223:1532523:3021323:451018/1/201120259749810950:151010:302020:450001:00000 Coolidge Ave During Test (Site 02) RSG Count1:151011:300111:450002:001012:150002:301012:450003:000113:150003:300113:450004:000114:150224:300114:450335:001125:153255:304155:450336:000116:152136:3037106:451567:0055107:1584127:30911207:45613198:001213258:15610168:3086148:45414189:0086149:1558139:3056119:451171810:00941310:15661210:306101610:4554911:0010112111:15871511:3011102111:451031312:0012132512:151762312:30841212:459132213:007121913:151562113:309112013:4510102014:0013132614:1512132514:301151614:451192015:0015102515:151372015:301171815:451372016:001592416:151572216:301782516:4514122617:0018112917:151982717:301282017:45841218:00931218:15561118:301292118:45781519:009514 Coolidge Ave During Test (Site 02) RSG Count19:15571219:3036919:4554920:001171820:15971620:3062820:4563921:0024621:1536921:3061721:45641022:0022422:1542622:3011222:4523523:0024623:1511223:3001123:453038/2/201100067149911700:153030:301010:453031:000001:150001:300001:451012:000002:150112:300002:450003:000223:150113:301123:450004:001234:150224:301234:451345:000115:151235:302135:453366:001126:154486:303586:454597:0079167:156397:30517227:45108188:00128208:15510158:3073108:45814229:0049139:15109199:30610169:45891710:001081810:151071710:301051510:451511611:001462011:151151611:30991811:451992812:001192012:1510112112:3011122312:4511102113:0015823 Coolidge Ave During Test (Site 02) RSG Count13:151541913:301181913:45471114:001372014:151331614:309152414:45931215:0018133115:152182915:3013122515:451451916:0011132416:15961516:301692516:451692517:0021103117:159142317:301482217:451021218:001192018:15691518:30571218:451061619:001552019:151021219:30941319:45851320:00961520:15961520:30931220:45471121:00831121:15941321:30751221:45681422:0042622:1501122:3030322:4510123:0040423:1501123:3043723:450228/3/201100061251311250:150000:302020:450001:001011:150111:300001:452022:000002:150002:302022:450003:000003:150113:300333:450114:000004:151234:301454:451125:000115:152465:302245:451236:004266:152466:302576:456177:009514 Coolidge Ave During Test (Site 02) RSG Count7:1575127:301317307:451018288:001010208:151114258:30711188:451010209:00910199:15610169:30511169:45761310:00871510:15671310:30671310:45861411:00681411:157101711:301131411:45961512:001251712:151572212:301572212:451181913:001652113:1516112713:301071713:451061614:00841214:151462014:307101714:4510122215:0013173015:1517173415:3010142415:451151616:001582316:151091916:3010132316:451061617:002373017:157132017:3020113117:45881618:00641018:15651118:30861418:45671319:00731019:151171819:3010102019:451151620:00741120:1561720:30831120:4513421:00551021:1514521:3081921:4543722:0032522:1521322:3022422:4530323:0020223:1512323:3002223:452248/4/201100060246510670:152130:301120:452021:00101 Coolidge Ave During Test (Site 02) RSG Count1:150001:301011:450002:000002:150002:301012:450003:000223:150003:300223:450004:001234:150004:300554:451235:001125:151455:302135:451456:001346:152136:303696:455387:0059147:1582107:30712197:45913228:001116278:15611178:3055108:4586149:0097169:15106169:3056119:451061610:00681410:151241610:30841210:45861411:00881611:151081811:30931211:451251712:0011102112:151081812:3011122312:451181913:0010112113:15851313:301151613:45651114:0013112414:15931214:301071714:45791615:00961515:151392215:3021113215:4517102716:0013152816:151392216:3010112116:451782517:001071717:151361917:30871517:451372018:0045918:15661218:301982718:45861419:00729 Coolidge Ave During Test (Site 02) RSG Count19:151462019:30771419:45831120:00551020:15771420:30841220:4571821:0021321:15821021:3032521:4521322:0034722:1551622:3013422:4521323:0042623:1522423:3023523:452028/5/201102263650211380:152020:303140:450111:001011:151011:300001:450112:000002:150002:300002:450003:000113:150003:300113:451014:001014:151234:302244:450335:000115:151235:301125:451236:003146:153146:305386:453477:0029117:154597:30812207:45811198:00158238:15911208:3099188:45513189:00714219:1597169:30912219:45751210:00951410:15891710:307111810:4515102511:001091911:15671311:301592411:451141512:001782512:1518133112:301972612:4513102313:00151530 Coolidge Ave During Test (Site 02) RSG Count13:159101913:3016122813:451692514:001382114:151582314:307101714:45991815:00991815:151192015:301392215:451171816:001131416:151171816:301271916:452262817:001582317:151472117:301171817:45741118:009101918:1572918:30661218:45781519:00951419:1543719:301181919:45671320:00641020:1533620:3021320:45741121:0043721:1553821:3031421:45911022:00551022:1503322:3032522:4554923:0002223:1532523:3024623:454048/6/201122462744010670:152020:302020:453031:000001:151011:301121:452132:000112:150112:302022:450003:001233:150003:300113:450114:000004:150004:300114:450005:000005:151015:300005:453146:003036:153366:301016:452137:00336 Coolidge Ave During Test (Site 02) RSG Count7:1547117:3074117:4575128:002578:156398:3096158:45911209:0098179:15183219:301611279:4516112710:0018123010:1516143010:3019143310:451792611:0014142811:151251711:3013122511:451942312:001972612:1512112312:301892712:451151613:001081813:1513132613:30961513:45651114:00851314:151071714:301141514:451562115:0013102315:15881615:301192015:451061616:001071716:15741116:30641016:451051517:00681417:1511112217:301051517:45571218:0044818:15861418:30551018:45821019:00781519:159101919:3044819:451041420:001251720:15471120:3062820:45561121:00781521:1543721:3030321:4522422:0032522:1501122:3014522:4522423:0032523:1534723:3031423:452138/7/20114044023087100:154150:301010:452021:00011 Coolidge Ave During Test (Site 02) RSG Count1:151231:301011:450002:000002:150002:300002:450113:000003:150003:301123:450004:000114:150004:300004:450115:000005:150005:300005:451016:001016:151126:301126:454267:001347:150227:300227:451458:000338:151458:302798:454599:0074119:154269:3066129:4524610:00761310:15561110:301051510:45891711:0033611:151081811:30961511:45961512:001271912:15681412:30471112:45651113:001621813:151241613:3053813:45761314:00781514:1543714:3010132314:45871515:00681415:1553815:30751215:451131416:001441816:1541516:30771416:451171817:00641017:15661217:30771417:4581918:0034718:158101818:30741118:4545919:0010515 Coolidge Ave During Test (Site 02) RSG Count19:15951419:3023519:4540420:00661220:151041420:30861420:4561721:0044821:1543721:3013421:4532522:0031422:1520222:3023522:4501123:0020223:1502223:3020223:452028/8/201132557143210030:151120:302130:450001:000001:151011:300001:450002:000002:150002:302022:450113:000003:150113:300113:450114:000004:150224:300114:450335:003255:150115:301125:452136:001016:152136:3064106:453477:004487:157297:30611177:45716238:001210228:1588168:30134178:4546109:004599:15116179:303699:4545910:0044810:15981710:30651110:451351811:001061611:15881611:30661211:451572212:001282012:15861412:301081812:455101513:0011718 Coolidge Ave During Test (Site 02) RSG Count13:15771413:30281013:45641014:001181914:15551014:301261814:4510102015:001472115:151351815:301091915:451141516:002383116:151482216:301382116:451071717:0016112717:1513102317:30551017:451171818:0013112418:159101918:30931218:45481219:001131419:151192019:301011119:4545920:001071720:1563920:30741120:4571821:0021321:1553821:30751221:4551622:0025722:1563922:3023522:4543723:0012323:1501123:3023523:451128/9/201130359145010410:151120:301120:450001:001121:150001:300111:450112:000002:150112:301012:450003:000113:150113:300003:450004:000114:150004:300334:451235:000115:153145:303145:452466:003366:152026:303476:455387:00358 Coolidge Ave During Test (Site 02) RSG Count7:155497:301010207:45420248:001411258:15125178:301415298:45412169:00514199:1575129:303479:45771410:001151610:1554910:301061610:451061611:00861411:15491311:309101911:4511122312:001071712:151061612:301251712:451361913:005111613:15841213:301282013:451341714:001682414:15951414:30761314:4514102415:001782515:15981715:301251715:4512142616:002362916:151161716:301692516:451582317:001862417:15981717:309152417:451141518:001071718:1553818:3062818:45591419:001081819:15741119:30871519:4544820:0031420:15931220:3062820:4570721:0061721:1532521:30651121:4533622:0051622:1523522:3012322:4532523:0020223:1503323:3020223:452028/10/201100061242410360:150000:301340:450001:00000 Coolidge Ave During Test (Site 02) RSG Count1:150001:300001:451012:000002:150002:301012:450003:000003:150113:300003:451124:001124:151234:300114:450335:002025:151345:302135:452356:000116:154156:305276:4574117:0076137:15115167:3069157:451116278:00139228:15410148:301011218:45310139:003479:1565119:3073109:4554910:00761310:15971610:301051510:451541911:00941311:15971611:30971611:451421612:001472112:151301312:30741112:4513102313:001361913:1514112513:301051513:451682414:004101414:151562114:301051514:45981715:001282015:151141515:301031315:451192016:001531816:151592416:301482216:451762317:0013132617:1512132517:3012112317:4514102418:00771418:151361918:30861418:45671319:008311 Coolidge Ave During Test (Site 02) RSG Count19:15661219:30831119:451061620:001021220:1512320:30761320:4542621:0072921:15561121:3043721:4532522:0022422:1511222:3021322:4526823:0012323:1535823:3010123:452028/11/201101160446910730:152020:300000:450001:001121:153031:301011:450002:000112:151012:300112:452133:001013:150113:300003:450224:000114:150004:301454:450225:001125:152575:303145:453366:001016:153256:3057126:4557127:0037107:154267:30107177:45106168:0088168:15611178:3049138:45814229:0087159:1589179:303699:45891710:0025710:15751210:301251710:4511122311:00761311:151051511:301081811:451292112:001241612:15871512:301061612:451372013:00111223 Coolidge Ave During Test (Site 02) RSG Count13:1510112113:301592413:45941314:001531814:155111614:309132214:451171815:0010102015:151562115:301081815:451041416:001662216:156101616:301282016:451261817:002283017:151131417:301081817:45961518:00841218:1553818:307121918:451382119:001341719:151061619:301091919:45561120:00481220:15761320:301021220:4545921:00831121:1530321:3081921:45561122:0072922:1543722:3024622:4511223:0063923:1541523:3023523:451128/12/20114042512064570:154040:301120:450111:000001:150001:300001:450112:000112:150002:300002:451123:000113:150113:300003:450114:000004:151014:301454:450445:000225:152355:304155:452136:003256:153146:3056116:455277:007411 Coolidge Ave During Test (Site 02) RSG Count7:1576137:305497:451113248:00714218:15126188:3085138:45610169:0076139:15915249:30105159:451071710:001521710:151261810:3010122210:45681411:001692511:151492311:301372011:451472112:0014122612:1525712:30000 Coolidge Avenue Direction 1 During TestRSG Count Time< 15 16 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total14:00351415111000000004915:00121312101000000003916:00331124110000000005217:0053141361000000004218:0000101990000000003819:001661351000000003220:00296830100000002921:00039550000000002222:00003711000000001223:000104200000000077/28/20110012000000000031:000000000000000002:000000100000000013:000000100000000014:001000000000000015:000011400000000066:0000145100000000117:002241010200000000308:002261112000000000339:002241751000000003110:0042111890000000004411:002261991000000003912:0032522110000000004313:004091592000000003914:00231022101000000004815:00241723130100000006016:0003434172000000006017:0062132471000000005318:003271791000000003919:0003161240000000003520:0016101320000000003221:00016330000000001322:00223031000000001123:000053010000000097/29/20111010000000000021:000002100000000032:000001000000000013:000001000000000014:001001000000000025:000012210000000066:0010146000000000127:00211065000000000248:002171911200000000429:002671460000000003510:00119961000000002711:000171280000000002812:00221325122100000005713:0032102842000000004914:0024716102000000004115:0033923100000000004816:0022834130000000005917:00241019121000000004818:0011111751000000003619:00017952000000002420:001171122000000002421:00116752000000002222:00006940000000001923:0000345000000000127/30/20110014100000000061:000001100000000022:000010000000000013:000010100000000024:000000100000000015:000001110000000036:001010000000000027:0001165000000000138:0000492200000000179:0000117120000000003010:000291950000000003511:0033101693000000004412:0010411101000000002713:0021617110000000003714:0022615111000000003715:0001511320000000022 Coolidge Avenue Direction 1 During TestRSG Count Time< 15 16 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total16:0002213141000000003217:000068132100000003018:000451261000000002819:000131251000000002220:000061050000000002121:002061040000000002222:00103641000000001523:0001173000000000127/31/20110100200000000031:000002000000000022:000000000000000003:000000000000000004:000001000000000015:001010200000000046:000102000000000037:000002210000000058:000014400000000099:00027640000000001910:001231450000000002511:003171481000000003412:000071544000000003013:000391060000000002814:00116440000000001615:001351013000000002316:001131550000000002517:000191511000000002718:00029731000000002219:00013951000000001920:0022101240000000003021:00115671000000002122:0000342000000000923:000102300000000068/1/20110022100000000051:000001000000000012:000001100000000023:000000000000000004:000000000000000005:001002500000000086:000011310000000067:00023157100000000288:000141311100000000309:003061541000000002910:00228860000000002611:0012915111000000003912:0023620132000000004613:004261792100000004114:002492372000000004715:0021921163000000005216:00231328132000000006117:00321222144000000005718:000291462000000003319:001251130000000002220:0023121230000000003221:00025370000000001722:0000243000000000923:000013200000000068/2/20110115000000000071:000010000000000012:000000000000000003:001000000000000014:001002000000000035:000003300000000066:0000291000000000127:00035136100000000288:00223148210000000329:00338932000000002810:00331117101000000004511:00631122101000000005312:0021111892000000004313:0004102371000000004514:0041818103000000004415:00032027124000000006616:00351415141000000005217:001016251110000000054 Coolidge Avenue Direction 1 During TestRSG Count Time< 15 16 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total18:001381550000000003219:002272740000000004220:0040121410000000003121:0022101150000000003022:0000341000000000823:000224000000000088/3/20110011000000000021:000001200000000032:000011000000000023:000000000000000004:001002000000000035:001000310000000056:0000166100000000147:001321714200000000398:000071813000000000389:004271040000000002710:000171442000000002811:001161681000000003312:0053102591000000005313:00451018141000000005214:002691471000000003915:00101319180000000005116:0002122083000000004517:0043928131000000005818:000281240000000002619:0052121550000000003920:000051250000000002221:00011961000000001822:00002350000000001023:000003110000000058/4/20110022100000000051:000002000000000022:000001000000000013:000000000000000004:000001100000000025:001002200000000056:0001233200000000117:0011589410000000298:00414136200000000309:003171562000000003410:000391561000000003411:0023516121000000003912:00001118131000000004313:006071650100000003514:0003916110000000003915:00361026114000000006016:0013142780000000005317:0012102380000000004418:002282131000000003719:0010131660000000003620:000171360000000002721:00005820000000001522:00001450100000001123:0021313000000000108/5/20110004100000000051:000020000000000022:000000000000000003:000000100000000014:001101100000000045:000002010000000036:0010336100000000147:0005746000000000228:0013131110000000000389:002591231000000003210:0013127142000000003911:002291991000000004212:00513162391000000006713:00271516141100000005614:0033121592000000004415:0022181561000000004416:0015182570000000005617:00241217101100000004718:0031111040000000002919:00211112310000000030 Coolidge Avenue Direction 1 During TestRSG Count Time< 15 16 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total20:00205830000000001821:00125921100000002122:00003730000000001323:000035100000000098/6/20110005400000000091:000001120000000042:001001000000000023:000100000000000014:000000000000000005:001001020000000046:002032110000000097:00035111100000000218:00011285000000000269:0043252142000000005910:0008253151000000007011:0019132870000000005812:00171324150000000006013:00131113100000000003814:00111516110000000004415:0004121871000000004216:002161860000000003317:000171590000000003218:00018970000000002519:000291360000000003020:001211940000000002721:00008611000000001622:0000140100000000623:0002144000000000118/7/201101244000000000111:000001100000000022:000000000000000003:000001000000000014:000000000000000005:000000100000000016:002013100000000077:000020000000000028:001042000000000079:00114850000000001910:001151481000000003011:002541361000000003112:003210580000000002813:0011131960000000004014:002091341000000002915:000091253000000002916:0004121342100000003617:000251460000000002718:002211700000000002219:00618910000000002520:00849720000000003021:00013710000000001222:0002131000000000723:000112110000000068/8/20111022100000000061:001000000000000012:000011000000000023:000000000000000004:000000000000000005:000003300000000066:0010163100000000127:000221010000000000248:00315179200000000379:000261130000000002210:0011111531000000003211:000661782000000003912:0003121280000000003513:000071162000000002614:0010817111000000003815:0003922112100000004816:00031031151000000006017:0010520172000000004518:001581181100000003519:0023101380000000003620:001261740000000003021:000258310000000019 Coolidge Avenue Direction 1 During TestRSG Count Time< 15 16 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total22:00124340000000001423:000010201000000048/9/20110101300000000051:000010000000000012:000001000000000013:000000000000000004:001000000000000015:000102410000000086:0010363000000000137:0002496100000000228:00037218500000000449:000010552000000002210:0023121090000000003611:001391450000000003212:0025131861000000004513:0013121741000000003814:0014151781000000004615:00011218163000000005016:00121628161100000006517:002382860000000004718:0030101030000000002619:001051652000000002920:00139840000000002521:00126630000000001822:00011441000000001123:000015000000000068/10/20110100000000000011:000010000000000012:000001000000000013:000000100000000014:000001100000000025:001012210000000076:0000268000000000167:003112127000000000358:00118136100000000309:00314742000000002110:0024111491000000004111:0013141670000000004112:0001152461000000004713:00341717102000000005314:0004111661000000003815:00221215103000000004416:00001435111000000006117:0045132081000000005118:0022111270000000003419:001291550000000003220:001361020000000002221:000051121000000001922:0010330000000000723:000033010000000078/11/20110002000000000021:000102110000000052:001010100000000033:000001000000000014:001000000000000015:001021410000000096:0000185000000000147:00115145100000000278:00117142100000000269:000431172000000002710:0012811100000000003211:0010102080000000003912:0003621130000000004313:0027111681000000004514:000072184000000004015:0012181571100000004516:0013152070000000004617:00311424100000000005218:002191560000000003319:001761491000000003820:002161231000000002521:00024792000000002422:00021740000000001423:000037210000000013 Coolidge Avenue Direction 1 During TestRSG Count Time< 15 16 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total8/12/20110135000000000091:000000000000000002:000001000000000013:000000000000000004:000001100000000025:000114200000000086:0013171210000000167:00055162200000000308:000110174100000000339:0035141310000000003610:0007141363000000004311:00132222720000000057 Coolidge Avenue Direction 2 During TestRSG Count Time15-Jan16 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total14:001281840000000003315:001151230000000002216:002361782000000003817:002361422000000002918:00156920000000002319:00348900000000002420:00234820000000001921:00313230000000001222:0011140000000000723:000002000000000027/28/20111022000000000051:000000000000000002:000002000000000023:000002100000000034:000005300000000085:000012200000000056:0000446010000000157:00303166300000000318:001081611500000000419:001041464000000002910:001351220000000002311:002231294000000003212:00139971000000003013:0000219100000000003114:002352191000000004115:005251640000000003216:003381390010000003717:005251140000000002718:002422140000000003319:0010131320000000002920:003011011000000001621:00012430000000001022:00511600000000001323:000011000000000027/29/20110100000000000011:000011110000000042:000002100000000033:001001100000000034:000003400000000075:000013200000000066:0010193000000000147:00028913000000000328:003441816200000000479:0031121432000000003510:0004111730000000003511:0043101570000000003912:004191341000000003213:001281151000000002814:0023715101000000003815:000261180000000002716:0040101150000000003017:001441340000000002618:002251140000000002419:001251350000000002620:00116901000000001821:00103420000000001022:0000134000000000823:000012311000000087/30/20110001110000000031:000000100000000012:000110000000000023:000000210000000034:000010000000000015:000000010000000016:001001100000000037:0021144200000000148:0022786000000000259:00111792000000002110:001451393000000003511:001061091000000002712:001051072000000002513:00029561000000002314:003358100000000020 Coolidge Avenue Direction 2 During TestRSG Count Time15-Jan16 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total15:000371361000000003016:00024560100000001817:000361230000000002418:00300851000000001719:00120611000000001120:00008511000000001521:001321141000000002222:00112422100000001323:000101210000000057/31/20110100100000000021:000011000000000022:000100000000000013:000000100000000014:000000001000000015:000111000000000036:000020010000000037:0000285200000000178:0002176300000000199:00124340000000001410:0011211102000000002711:00308970000000002712:00113871000000002113:000246100000000002214:00112951000000001915:00535722000000002416:00107844000000002417:00141721000000001618:00115660000000001919:00153520000000001620:00113701000000001321:00005530000000001322:0001123000000000723:000112100000000058/1/20110000000000000001:000010000000000012:000000000000000003:000002000000000024:000012400000000075:000004120000000076:0000265100000000147:00014179110000000338:000442012210000000439:00553851000000002710:000321351000000002411:0023101051000000003112:004281651000000003613:0024101184000000003914:008331970000000004015:00448771000000003116:0031810130100000003617:004351162000000003118:00236780000000002619:00024960100000002220:00318322000000001921:00037410000000001522:0000250010000000823:000122100000000068/2/20110000000000000001:000000000000000002:000001000000000013:001021000000000044:000014400000000095:000023200000000076:0000266100000000157:00239109400000000378:000171312200000000359:0012518101000000003710:00021882000000002111:00537752000000002912:0033131481000000004213:001251144000000002714:002161360000000002815:00131014910000000038 Coolidge Avenue Direction 2 During TestRSG Count Time15-Jan16 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total16:0043811101000000003717:004271470000000003418:004061740000000003119:00125350000000001620:001251121000000002221:00325730000000002022:0000201000000000323:000411000000000068/3/20110000000000000001:000001000000000012:000000000000000003:002002100000000054:000021400000000075:000003420000000096:0001153110000000127:000082017000000000458:002272310100000000459:0010361341000000003710:00218951100000002711:000061290000000002712:00135773100000002713:00478640000000002914:0020121440000000003215:0081152252000000005316:004391361000000003617:0045613101000000003918:00037741000000002219:00326842000000002520:00015320000000001121:00106330000000001322:0000221000000000523:000021210000000068/4/20110002000000000021:000000000000000002:000000000000000003:000003010000000044:000005310000000095:0011115100000000106:0011181100000000137:000161513100000000368:001171511300000000389:00115990000000002510:002231041000000002211:00407670000000002412:004559122100000003813:00147581000000002614:000241482000000003015:004281480000000003616:000472750000000004317:000171252000000002718:001161061000000002519:001121130000000001820:00065420000000001721:0000213000000000622:0000351000000000923:001131100000000078/5/20110003100000000041:000010000000000012:000000000000000003:001001000000000024:000013210000000075:000012120000000066:001213200000000097:001281013300000000378:00239159300000000419:0061515101000000003810:001381850000000003511:000181370000000002912:007271381000000003813:0023132170000000004614:0022121450000000003515:00201110101000000003416:000079610000000023 Coolidge Avenue Direction 2 During TestRSG Count Time15-Jan16 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total17:000461150000000002618:00413990000000002619:002071130000000002320:00111621000000001221:0001061000000000822:00122621000000001423:000124100000000088/6/20110110000000000021:000000200000000022:000011000000000023:000010300000000044:000001000000000015:000000100000000016:001011100000000047:0002296000000000198:00223124200000000259:002012892000000003310:0025231522000000004911:0041131232000000003512:002291432000000003213:002451280100000003214:00129370000000002215:0011111370000000003316:00125930000000002017:001610851000000003118:00034370000000001719:001112561000000002620:00038720000000002021:00122440000000001322:0012131100000000923:000026000000000088/7/20110000100000000011:000011010000000032:000010000000000013:000000100000000014:000011000000000025:000000000000000006:000103000000000047:0001034300000000118:0014175100000000199:00113650000000001610:00128870000000002611:00364910000000002312:004541130000000002713:00015351000000001514:002391250000000003115:00005941000000001916:00035830000000001917:00111960000000001818:002011460000000002319:00312340000000001320:00514520000000001721:00052410000000001222:0000121100000000523:000010100000000028/8/20111102000000000041:000000000000000002:000001000000000013:000003000000000034:000003210000000065:000003110000000056:000015300000000097:00123917100000000338:00234810100000000289:001021090000000002210:00235831000000002211:003161061000000002712:002481350000000003213:002451131000000002614:001361441000000002915:000238101100000002516:002461360000000003117:0012913800000000033 Coolidge Avenue Direction 2 During TestRSG Count Time15-Jan16 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total18:0010615100000000003219:00122850000000001820:00023640000000001521:00111421000000001022:00014630000000001423:000212200000000078/9/20110011000000000021:000012000000000032:000001000000000013:000001100000000024:000002310000000065:000004210000000076:0002214100000000107:000391114200000000398:000462011200000000439:001241760000000003010:00057630000000002111:0023141242000000003712:00316941000000002413:00128970000000002714:00329771000000002915:0013101380000000003516:00153992000000002917:002161842000000003318:00025761000000002119:00243770000000002320:0000321000000000621:00014420000000001122:0001331000000000823:000011100000000038/10/20110111000000000031:000000000000000002:000000000000000003:000002000000000024:000014200000000075:000015100000000076:000121310000000087:000081611100000000368:001042112200000000409:00022930000000001610:00114862000000002211:00215480000000002012:00134940000000002113:002161191000000003014:0012101141000000002915:00225870000000002416:00163871000000002617:00321016141100000004718:004071041000000002619:000311031000000001820:00031601100000001221:00013720000000001322:00034300000000001023:000104110000000078/11/20110001000000000011:000100000000000012:000111000000000033:000012000000000034:000013210000000075:0000260200000000106:0000256300000000167:0001468210000000228:001121819100000000429:001151572000000003110:00227691000000002711:001310761000000002812:00218741100000002413:003441591000000003614:003351454000000003415:005051440000000002816:0025111020000000003017:002081320000000002518:002199510000000027 Coolidge Avenue Direction 2 During TestRSG Count Time15-Jan16 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total19:002141350000000002520:002231040000000002121:00102430000000001022:00012520000000001023:000114200000000088/12/20110100010000000021:000000001000000012:000002000000000023:000001200000000034:000004310000000085:000012211000000076:0010244000000000117:00226123200000000278:001161610100000000359:005351262000000003310:001271061100000002811:0033913400000000032 Horicon During Test (Site 01)RSG CountDirection 1Direction 2TotalTimeDirection 1Direction 2Total50Thurs7/28/2011955884183912:30131427146Fri7/29/20111092967205912:4522931242Sat7/30/2011762751151313:00211839338Sun7/31/2011579569114813:1571825434Mon8/1/2011917829174613:30181129530Tue8/2/20111003882188513:45181230626Weds8/3/2011944850179414:00141327722Thurs8/4/20119298761805<-- Speed Feedback sign installed this day14:15131023818Fri8/5/2011923826174914:3013720914Sat8/6/2011649623127214:45139221010Sun8/7/2011609578118715:001810281106Mon8/8/2011908850175815:15279361202Tue8/9/20111049702175115:302215371298Weds8/10/2011906821172715:45219301394Thurs8/11/2011880818169816:0027154216:1535641M-FWith StripingStriping + Radar Sign16:30271542Average Weekday18011855173716:45331851Average Weekend12801331123017:0025184317:1521173817:3016112717:4518203818:0021133418:159152418:3014112518:458101819:0016112719:151081819:301792619:4510132320:0012122420:1512172920:3013122520:4513132621:008122021:15471121:30471121:451151622:007121922:15841222:3063922:4571823:0033623:15641023:3052723:451017/28/201111295588418390:152130:301120:453031:001011:150001:302021:452022:002022:153032:300002:450003:000223:150003:300113:451014:000114:151014:300114:451015:001235:150445:300445:453696:003586:1539126:3019106:45814227:00310137:15716237:301121327:45930398:00726338:151220328:301013238:451218309:00516219:151016269:301010209:4551015 Horicon During Test (Site 01)RSG Count10:001372010:1510102010:3015122710:4512183011:007121911:155111611:3010102011:4514142812:0017133012:1523103312:3019173612:4514163013:0029184713:1515102513:3017102713:4519214014:0017112814:151492314:301472114:4515203515:0020143415:1515173215:3017133015:4520133316:0013112416:1518183616:3022123416:4526133917:0028164417:1524153917:3028154317:4521123318:0021183918:151592418:3023184118:4514112519:002262819:1520163619:30981719:4512142620:0014152920:15971620:301091920:451181921:001061621:151652121:30671321:451161722:00991822:151552022:30751222:4513423:0013423:1523523:3020223:454157/29/2011213109296720590:154260:302020:451011:000001:150111:301011:451122:001012:150112:301122:451013:001123:150003:300223:450004:000114:152134:302244:450445:000005:152465:300555:451566:003476:152796:30517226:451410247:001013237:151718357:301723407:45154055 Horicon During Test (Site 01)RSG Count8:003028588:151534498:301817358:451721389:002430549:151817359:301825439:4533164910:0021183910:1524153910:3021113210:4520153511:0022133511:1522194111:3017122911:4522214312:0019244312:1518133112:3019183712:4520183813:0023133613:1511122313:301992813:4520193914:0021133414:1518153314:30851314:4514112515:0014213515:1515142915:3029154415:451772416:001792616:1516143016:3025123716:4524143817:0029114017:152092917:3021143517:451982718:001642018:151382118:308101818:459142319:009112019:1510142419:3010132319:458101820:00951420:15771420:30971620:45821021:00651121:15851321:30681421:45781522:00551022:151261822:30471122:45671323:00841223:15561123:3015623:455277/30/201113476275115130:152240:304040:455161:000001:151011:301121:452132:001012:152022:300112:452023:001233:150003:301233:450114:002024:150114:300004:450005:000005:151125:301235:45235 Horicon During Test (Site 01)RSG Count6:003146:151566:302356:455387:004597:1528107:30010107:4568148:001010208:1599188:3069158:451321349:00148229:151117289:301311249:4510192910:0014163010:1516203610:3015142910:4513122511:0016163211:1522113311:3015193411:4512122412:0011122312:1517193612:3012142612:4525133813:001582313:151392213:3014142813:4516112714:007132014:1514132714:308132114:451562115:0013223515:1515153015:3016153115:4511142516:009101916:151672316:301091916:451462017:0014173117:151271917:301382117:4512102218:001181918:157111818:30861418:451292119:001382119:158122019:30861419:45761320:007101720:154131720:30961520:459101921:001061621:157101721:306111721:45791622:00551022:159112022:30591422:4512323:0053823:1581923:3063923:4573107/31/201144857956911480:150440:300110:453251:001011:155271:301011:452242:003252:151122:300002:451123:000113:150003:300003:45000 Horicon During Test (Site 01)RSG Count4:001014:151124:300004:450115:000005:150005:300225:451126:000226:151676:304266:451457:003257:1528107:30411157:451788:000778:154268:30610168:45617239:0048129:153699:301010209:45981710:005172210:151071710:30761310:4510132311:0016143011:151081811:301592411:451382112:0012112312:151482212:30671312:457121913:0012102213:158111913:30891713:451292114:007142114:1554914:301091914:4515102515:001341715:151541915:30491315:45781516:001361916:151091916:309112016:452092917:001091917:151642017:30781517:451572218:00791618:151282018:3011112218:45871519:009101919:15971619:308162419:451081820:001351820:15881620:301081820:45771421:004101421:1541521:30471121:4563922:0008822:1522422:3042622:4544823:0033623:1563923:3052723:452138/1/201151691782917460:151120:301010:451121:000111:151121:300001:45000 Horicon During Test (Site 01)RSG Count2:002132:152132:300002:451013:000113:150113:300003:450114:000114:150004:301014:450005:001455:151235:301345:454376:003586:15211136:30311146:451019297:0097167:15823317:301024347:45929388:00616228:15916258:30415198:45109199:00610169:15915249:30418229:455141910:0020113110:151582310:3018143210:4512152711:0012152711:1514152911:3045911:4518143212:0024123612:1518143212:3014122612:4519163513:0022184013:1512112313:3015132813:4515173214:0011142514:151392214:3015112614:4515122715:0022163815:158111915:302393215:4514152916:001521716:1518203816:302973616:4520153517:0038114917:1522204217:3024113517:4524113518:002092918:1512122418:301492318:4513152819:001492319:1515153019:301361919:451361920:0010102020:151282020:301372020:45671321:001462021:15731021:308111921:451131422:001071722:1551622:3021322:4527923:00641023:1512323:3032523:45101 Horicon During Test (Site 01)RSG Count8/2/2011516100388218850:153140:300000:450221:005271:150001:303031:450002:002132:150002:301122:450003:000223:150003:300113:450004:000004:152134:300114:450115:000225:150335:300445:453366:001566:15011116:30414186:45138217:00512177:151215277:30925347:451533488:001023338:15718258:301115268:45818269:00612189:151511269:301512279:4513112410:0011213210:1515163110:3019173610:4513142711:0013162911:151482211:3021133411:4511122312:0014193312:1517234012:301482212:451192013:0021143513:1510142413:3020183813:4514142814:0018193714:151372014:3020143414:4515142915:0027144115:1525123715:3022133515:4518153316:0015142916:1515112616:303394216:4530215117:0029194817:1525204517:3019143317:4526133918:0022103218:1516102618:3013102318:4519143319:001282019:15971619:301292119:451282020:001792620:151772420:30931220:4511122321:001531821:151631921:303101321:458311 Horicon During Test (Site 01)RSG Count22:003111422:15841222:3012322:4553823:0031423:151001023:3030323:453148/3/201132594485017940:150110:302130:453031:002021:150001:302131:451012:003362:152022:300002:450003:001013:150113:300113:450004:000004:150004:301124:451015:001125:150335:300335:453696:003476:15117186:30013136:451010207:00713207:15714217:301027377:45618248:001021318:15822308:30109198:451122339:00914239:15611179:30920299:4512132510:0012102210:151091910:309122110:451662211:0016122811:151361911:3017163311:4514132712:0021133412:1513152812:30981712:4519123113:0031124313:1514112513:3020103013:4519133214:0013213414:15781514:3012142614:4513112415:0017143115:1523103315:3026164215:4514112516:0027123916:1516143016:3032164816:4525214617:0034144817:1526103617:3026164217:4521173818:0014142818:1512172918:301672318:4515112619:0013142719:1513112419:3013142719:45141428 Horicon During Test (Site 01)RSG Count20:007121920:151251720:301341720:451081821:0036921:15651121:301071721:45771422:00771422:15551022:3080822:4542623:0080823:1521323:3002223:453258/4/201123592987618050:152240:302020:452131:000551:152241:300001:450112:001122:150002:300002:450003:002023:150113:300003:450004:000114:150004:300114:452355:000225:150775:300225:4537106:004376:15211136:30511166:45811197:00314177:15617237:301422367:451226388:001124358:151226388:30710178:451414289:001217299:15811199:30114159:457202710:001192010:15891710:301051510:4510162611:001792611:1512112311:3016122811:4510102012:0014152912:1519143312:3013162912:4516102613:0022133513:159182713:3024143813:4519214014:0016143014:1513162914:3011132414:4513142715:0014173115:1515153015:302493315:4520193916:0012213316:1524184216:3029184716:453294117:0029134217:1527123917:3017112817:4529938 Horicon During Test (Site 01)RSG Count18:0014112518:1521123318:3010122218:4513122519:0014132719:1522103219:30981719:4512112320:001091920:15771420:301061620:451071721:0011102121:15941321:301061621:4533622:007101722:15641022:3013422:4544823:0041523:1562823:3021323:455058/5/201130392382617490:156170:301120:452131:001231:154151:300111:450112:000002:151122:300002:450003:000003:150113:300113:450004:001234:150004:301124:450005:000225:150335:301345:450776:002356:1538116:30113146:45129217:00513187:15313167:30725327:451824428:001224368:15612188:30911208:451117289:00108189:15118199:301025359:4513112410:001892710:1511152610:309182710:4514142811:0016193511:1514173111:3016193511:4510112112:0021163712:1520193912:3020133312:4513132613:0020193913:151392213:301592413:4515173214:009132214:159101914:3020133314:4515112615:0024113515:1516122815:3015142915:4522830 Horicon During Test (Site 01)RSG Count16:001852316:1515102516:3029144316:4525133817:0025103517:152722917:3018123017:4512142618:0013122518:151692518:301472118:4516122819:00971619:15891719:3013142719:4512112320:001141520:151582320:3054920:451282021:001421621:15761321:30971621:45871522:00591422:15681422:3052722:45731023:00861423:15741123:3033623:452248/6/201121364962312720:150220:302240:453251:000001:151011:300001:451232:003032:152132:301232:450003:000003:150113:300003:450004:001014:150004:300114:450005:001125:150335:301015:452356:000116:152576:302246:454487:0019107:152577:305387:4546108:001898:1538118:30511168:45610169:0098179:1557129:3048129:451161710:00951410:1515112610:3010132310:4511172811:001982711:1510122211:3010192911:4513223512:0011112212:1517143112:301141512:4511102113:0015112613:159172613:301372013:4511819 Horicon During Test (Site 01)RSG Count14:0015142914:15871514:301271914:4512152715:0014102415:1516153115:309182715:459132216:001081816:1512102216:301271916:45951417:002352817:1513102317:301572217:459132218:009122118:159101918:301282018:45741119:001292119:15771419:30691519:45881620:005131820:15871520:301151620:45581321:001251721:156111721:30661221:45821022:00741122:15961522:3061722:45821023:0045923:1542623:3021323:451348/7/201162860957811870:1574110:302240:452021:000001:151121:301121:451122:000002:150112:302132:450003:002243:150003:301013:450004:000224:150224:301234:451015:000115:151125:300225:451456:001236:150006:302576:4546107:001787:150557:30210127:450668:001128:155168:3038118:4559149:0069159:153699:30711189:456131910:00471110:151271910:30741110:451482211:0010172711:158202811:308122011:459817 Horicon During Test (Site 01)RSG Count12:0015153012:1518112912:309152412:451872513:001071713:15781513:301261813:451392214:0015142914:158142214:3011112214:4512102215:0014132715:1515173215:305101515:451081816:001692516:1518102816:301151616:4516102617:001192017:151071717:301382117:45581318:00981718:153111418:30851318:4514102419:001462019:151662219:309132219:451061620:00881620:15931220:30861420:451031321:00851321:15661221:30561121:45821022:00751222:1516722:3060622:4553823:0031423:1523523:3013423:450118/8/201172990885017580:151340:300000:450221:001121:152021:300111:450002:000002:150002:301122:451123:000003:150003:300113:451014:000224:150004:300114:450115:000115:150445:300335:453586:004486:1549136:30412166:4599187:00812207:15318217:301028387:451426408:00621278:15722298:30814228:45812209:001314279:1568149:30414189:45111223 Horicon During Test (Site 01)RSG Count10:0012142610:153111410:3011132410:4513132611:001271911:1512132511:309132211:4517234012:0021173812:159152412:301792612:451562113:0014173113:1510112113:301592413:4520123214:0017153214:1512132514:3012132514:4515112615:0019173615:1514173115:3017102715:4511132416:0027113816:1524184216:3022143616:4525164117:0033185117:1535155017:3026133917:4528103818:002152618:151282018:301572218:4511172819:0014132719:151151619:3013132619:451992820:001192020:151081820:301361920:4511112221:0052721:15931221:30481221:451462022:00591422:1534722:3053822:4552723:0034723:1563923:3052723:450228/9/2011336104970217510:152130:302020:450111:000001:150001:302241:450112:001012:150002:300002:451013:000223:150003:300113:450114:000114:151014:300004:450335:000115:151345:300225:454376:004596:15712196:30115166:45615217:00817257:15715227:301026367:45112738 Horicon During Test (Site 01)RSG Count8:00631378:15719268:30811198:45910199:00911209:15812209:3087159:4512142610:008192710:15891710:3013132610:457132011:0014152911:1514142811:308122011:4515122712:0018143212:1515173212:3014132712:4518203813:0014142813:1521143513:3019133213:4524133714:0013152814:1512112314:3011112214:4516163215:002112215:153103115:303503515:452202216:003403416:153503516:305405416:455005017:003503517:155205217:303073717:4522113318:002193018:151882618:3010132318:4515132819:002142519:1513102319:301382119:4513102320:00881620:151051520:30951420:451031321:00581321:15641021:3053821:4536922:00871522:1523522:3031422:4540423:0031423:1541523:3002223:454158/10/201110190682117270:152240:303250:450001:002131:151011:300111:450112:000222:151012:300002:450003:000113:150003:300333:450004:001124:150004:300004:451125:000115:150225:300445:45246 Horicon During Test (Site 01)RSG Count6:003586:15311146:30511166:4548127:00210127:151318317:301427417:451123348:00725328:15819278:301314278:451021319:00714219:1568149:30139229:459132210:0012162810:1510152510:301181910:4512142611:001692511:152593411:301081811:4512162812:0017122912:157121912:3013122512:4520204013:0020183813:1512112313:3020113113:4520113114:0013142714:158142214:301382114:451372015:0013112415:1518143215:301862415:4519153416:0024143816:1528164416:3028134116:4521153617:0033124517:1528124017:3025214617:4517143118:0018143218:1510112118:3014132718:451292119:001271919:151171819:301271919:4513102320:0013102320:151261820:301482220:451071721:00551021:15651121:301051521:4534722:0054922:15551022:3063922:4553823:0044823:1530323:3031423:452358/11/201112388081816980:154370:300110:450111:000221:150111:300221:450002:000002:152022:301122:450003:001013:151013:300113:45000 Horicon During Test (Site 01)RSG Count4:000114:151014:300114:451345:000115:150445:301565:454596:003476:1546106:30613196:4558137:00511167:15815237:30713207:45731388:001025358:15615218:30138218:45616229:0098179:1559149:301012229:4512112310:0014102410:1511102110:3015173210:4512152711:009142311:1513152811:3013112411:457132012:001692512:1516143012:3015142912:451882613:0012172913:1513112413:3023133613:4513162914:009112014:151772414:301592414:45681415:002172815:1518143215:3023103315:4518102816:001992816:152493316:3021123316:4525164117:0037114817:1517122917:3016112717:4515173218:0019153418:1516173318:301682418:4512172919:0013142719:1513112419:3014142819:4515122720:008132120:151562120:30951420:451161721:001071721:1563921:30791621:451462022:00681422:15671322:30641022:4502223:0022423:1504423:3032523:4557128/12/20112132664186840:151120:3082100:452351:000221:150001:301451:45000 Horicon During Test (Site 01)RSG Count2:002022:151122:300112:450003:002353:151123:300113:452134:000114:151124:300004:450335:001125:153475:302575:450446:003476:151896:30016166:4567137:00717247:15410147:301118297:45923328:001318318:15930398:3089178:45915249:001312259:151524399:30617239:457121910:007142110:1518102810:3013213410:4514173111:0010233311:1512203211:3014132711:4519143312:009615 Horicon During Test Direction 1RSG Count Time< 1516 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total13:0069252040000000006414:0018241820000000005315:00315362860000000008816:0011136229700000000012217:0089332631000000008018:0036241612000000005219:0046291220000000005320:00513201020000000005021:006512220000000002722:002371051000000002823:0002641110000000157/28/20110024100000000071:000023000000000052:000112010000000053:000000100000000014:000011000000000025:000002200000000046:0000463110000000157:00151077000000000308:0021017102000000000419:004910610000000003010:00410201420000000005011:001722330000000003612:00415311940000000007313:00811381931000000008014:00415241520000000006015:00413262810000000007216:00512391841000000007917:008203034810000000010118:00211312360000000007319:0025302321000000006320:0021215951000000004421:0028191220000000004322:0025141010000000003223:000041301000000097/29/20111214100000000091:000011000000000022:000110100000000033:000001000000000014:001002100000000045:000111000000000036:0015754200000000247:003214940000000000598:005819300000000000809:0066194310000000009310:0055197500000000008611:00362512910000000008312:002511261400000000007613:002016171640000000007314:00510201970000000006115:00915242151000000007516:00114194080000000008217:0068274341000000008918:0039112030000000004619:0026101351000000003720:0003101532000000003321:0011101221000000002722:000061731000000002723:0003394000000000197/30/201100461100000000121:000121000000000042:000002201000000053:000101000000000024:000001000010000025:000110110000000046:0011153000000000117:0010361100000000128:007141142000000000389:001012101150000000004810:00511151881000000005811:00713182070000000006512:00415192151000000006513:00151230820000000058 Horicon During Test Direction 1RSG Count Time< 1516 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total14:00201515102000000004415:0026826110200000005516:00311120140000000004917:0003112672101000005118:003072431000000003819:0013141350000000003620:004015730000000002921:0004141020000000003022:00208730000000002023:00017105300000000267/31/20110015010000000071:000052200000000092:000021200000000053:000000000000000004:000011000000000025:000010000000000016:001111200000000067:0001251100000000108:0020652100000000169:00239741000000002610:001141691000000003211:0052152651000000005412:0031131570000000003913:0010131961000000004014:0025101262000000003715:000471891000000003916:0011231971000000005217:0016132080000000004818:003291581000000003819:006171561000000003620:0033141521000000003821:00032841000000001822:00101511100000001023:0011373100000000168/1/20110034100000000081:000001000000000012:000010220000000053:000000000000000004:000000100000000015:000014200000000076:0020491200000000187:000261213300000000368:00149114000000000299:000271050000000002410:00351328151000000006511:0004132173000000004812:00422927112000000007513:0013222783000000006414:0031162374000000005415:00371131141000000006716:00452636110000000008217:003633491520000000010818:00161128112000000005919:0001192393000000005520:0004141751000000004121:0034151053000000004022:00025471000000001923:0000335000000000118/2/20110012500000000081:000023210000000082:000012000000000033:000000000000000004:000000200000000025:000000210000000036:00004102200000000187:00018238100000000418:00269136000000000369:0067181710000000004910:0049251640000000005811:0036242141000000005912:0003182582000000005613:00351926120000000006514:000519251430000000066 Horicon During Test Direction 1RSG Count Time< 1516 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total15:00172541171000000009216:00423039171000000009317:00252841194000000009918:0066222970000000007019:00121220100000000004520:0028201941000000005421:0031151832000000004222:00004940000000001723:00015103000000000198/3/20110133100000000081:000012200000000052:000111200000000053:000001000000000014:000000110000000025:001000210000000046:0000364100000000147:00067106010000000308:007712121000000000399:0034161120000000003610:0037241111000000004711:00010182651000000006012:00710202410000000006213:00620401530000000008414:00111711510000000004515:001016431010000000008016:006164923510000000010017:0017264221100000000010718:0023192481000000005719:00021026141000000005320:004192062000000004221:002241170000000002622:000081240000000002423:0000533110000000138/4/20110115100000000081:000020000000000022:001000000000000013:000002000000000024:000001100000000025:000010200000000036:0011484100000000197:001071213200000000358:001113217100000000449:0031131353000000003810:0024101570010000003911:0085112370100000005512:0073202552000000006213:00441534152000000007414:00311615162000000005315:00121536190000000007316:00463040170000000009717:0031134401040000000010218:00431425111000000005819:003882972000000005720:0013121830000000003721:003191460000000003322:00005841000000001823:0012463100000000178/5/201110281000000000121:000014000000000052:000000100000000013:000000000000000004:000000110000000025:000010000000000016:00102103110000000187:000114142200000000338:00639127100000000389:0022181660000000004410:0027151891000000005211:0044927120000000005612:00421729174100000007413:00162024111000000006314:0033201872000000005315:000326311430000000077 Horicon During Test Direction 1RSG Count Time< 1516 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total16:00361842162000000008717:00531941113000000008218:00351224123000000005919:0001922100000000004220:0043121743000000004321:0001161650000000003822:000181040000000002323:00006112100000000208/6/20110042010000000071:000011000000000022:000102300000000063:000000000000000004:000000100000000015:000011200000000046:001012301000000087:0000434100000000128:0030273000000000159:000251471000000002910:00411413121000000004511:0045132172000000005212:003382394000000005013:0034721112000000004814:0022152250100000004715:0005823101000010004816:0001625110000000004317:0045202641000000006018:0012715102000000003719:0002161140000000003320:0013121120000000002921:0014111330000000003222:0013141020000000003023:0001541000000000118/7/201101753100000000171:000003000000000032:000010100000000023:000001200000000034:000001010000000025:000020000000000026:000001420000000077:001001100000000038:0001561100000000149:00117850000000002210:0024121261000000003711:003212972000000003512:00115132461000000006013:000692061000000004214:0022161772000000004615:002292380000000004416:0034162783000000006117:0023121750000000003918:003271075000000003419:0042823102000000004920:0020101760000000003521:000271260000000002722:00007750000000001923:000023010000000068/8/20110042200000000081:000111000000000032:000001100000000023:000001000000000014:000000000000000005:000001110000000036:00001108200000000217:003261113000000000358:00538103000000000299:000291391000000003410:000142680000000003911:0022142192000000005012:0035182790000000006213:00461622101000000005914:0044152292000000005615:00011828131000000006116:002538401210000000098 Horicon During Test Direction 1RSG Count Time< 1516 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total17:003430572710000000012218:00241623130100000005919:0012928161000000005720:0033201270000000004521:0020610130100000003222:00114640200000001823:0010424120000000148/9/20110131200000000071:000001100000000022:000002000000000023:000000000000000004:000010000000000015:000001400000000056:0010356210000000187:0011101410000000000368:00011396100000000309:0014151052000000003710:0033111171000000003611:0033191583000000005112:00411927131000000006513:00582925110000000007814:0035182150000000005215:00107011000000000010916:00173000000000000017317:001112613700000000013918:00211333105000000006419:00141228132000000006020:0002151550000000003721:00524611000000001922:00036530000000001723:0002350100000000118/10/20110023001000000061:000011100000000032:000000100000000013:000000000000000004:000002000000000025:000000100100000026:0001072500000000157:002261413300000000408:001412138000000000389:0022101641000000003510:0034161272100000004511:00210192480000000006312:0047172351000000005713:00451833102000000007214:0014102561000000004715:003101327150000000006816:006620442140000000010117:003419502241000000010318:0044921142000000005419:0021725121000000004820:0032142360010000004921:002171220000000002422:00044571000000002123:0000424200000000128/11/20110121010000000051:000000000000000002:000001110000000033:000000200000000024:000001100000000025:000002210000000056:00201121200000000187:00023147100000000278:001110156110000000359:004218930000000003610:0014281900000000005211:0058161210000000004212:00521924132000000006513:00741524101000000006114:00121315160000000004715:00211842151100000008016:00342838150100000008917:002213501800000000085 Horicon During Test Direction 1RSG Count Time< 1516 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total18:00031428161010000006319:0003142792000000005520:0012181542100000004321:0033101452000000003722:00005631210000001823:0000143200000000108/12/201100463000000000131:000000100000000012:000002100000000033:000002300000000054:000001000000000015:000023100000000066:0000225100000000107:00208129000000000318:00239187000000000399:0014151920000000004110:0012142762000000005211:00631716931000000055 Horicon During Test Direction 2RSG Count Time< 1516 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total13:00161822102000000005914:0002181540000000003915:0025161190000000004316:0057112461000000005417:0047242361100000006618:0040926100000000004919:0035141261000000004120:0038271600000000005421:002314750000000003122:00215831000000002023:000034020000000097/28/20110020100000000031:000000000000000002:000000000000000003:000001200000000034:000000200000000025:0000293200000000166:00234168400000000377:0014213614100000000778:0056183711000000000779:0066171751000000005210:0014181860000000004711:0054191081000000004712:001311131360000000005613:0075162371000000005914:0036151733000000004715:0047201781000000005716:0016182270000000005417:00621819102100000005818:00221425121000000005619:0036159110000000004420:0024101670000000003921:000291111000000002422:00217912000000002223:000013300000000077/29/20110001020000000031:000011000000000022:000001001000000023:000002100000000034:001023110000000085:0010274000000000146:00129203300000000387:00271631182000000000948:00432327610000000001009:00472013800000000008810:00101821820000000005911:00191030420000000006512:00127312030000000007313:0063122390000000005314:0047131370000000004415:0043182083100000005716:0052131991000000004917:00311115102000000004218:003571740000000003619:0043817133000000004820:00015851100000002121:00317870000000002622:00007980100000002523:0000385100000000177/30/20110103200000000061:000002000000000022:000000100000000013:000013100000000054:000001000000000015:000013200000000066:0001344000000000127:00315128200000000318:004614178000000000499:00810171550000000005510:001011191390000000006211:0059201941000000005812:005101219111000000005813:00431014920000000042 Horicon During Test Direction 2RSG Count Time< 1516 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total14:0024813153000000004515:0032153672100000006616:000232052000000003217:0001111793100000004218:002261860000000003419:001181480000000003220:0045101451000000003921:0001111581000000003622:00125991000000002723:0001241200000000107/31/201102224000100000111:000003010000000042:000003100000000043:000000100000000014:000010100000000025:000002100000000036:0001236200000000147:00111178000000000288:002131712100000000369:001141671200000003210:0023914123000000004311:0052814100000000003912:0031415123000000003813:001072092000000003914:004052071000000003715:00103993000000002516:0012413141000000003517:000041482000000002818:000171980000000003519:004052453000000004120:004010950000000002821:00116652000000002122:000031012000000001623:000106110000000098/1/20110012000000000031:000000110000000022:000001100000000023:000000210000000034:000010000000000015:0000174000000000126:001132117300000000467:000193830500000000838:001382318300000000569:005193192000000005710:0000719175000000004811:001272774100000004912:00241517142000000005413:000293693000000005914:00311016131200000004615:00341017143000000005116:00031316111000000004417:00311321123000000005318:0022122072000000004519:0000712152000000003620:0002101450100000003221:001281020000000002322:00013642000000001623:001004210000000088/2/20110021010000000041:000000200000000022:000001100000000023:000000210000000034:000000300000000035:0000363000000000126:000051714200000000387:002073929800000000858:0020123619500000000749:00111615112000000004610:0026252681000000006811:0044161870000000004912:00202024111100000005913:0064162770000000006014:004315191030000000054 Horicon During Test Direction 2RSG Count Time< 1516 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total15:0024172172100000005416:00342015121000000005517:00102127160100000006618:0050141492000000004419:0004111232000000003220:001514920000000003121:00214921000000001922:000021332000000002023:000002000000000028/3/20110111100000000041:000001000000000012:000012000000000033:000002000000000024:000000001000000015:0000175000000000136:001052017100000000447:0030103918200000000728:0022213314200000000749:0034182292000000005810:000172360000000003711:00271311130100000004712:0053151681000000004813:0031317931000000004614:00612231210000000005415:0021523722000000005116:00312221880000000006317:0096181950000000005718:0041132083000000004919:0022821172010000005320:002151560000000002921:000161170000000002522:00002741000000001423:000021200000000058/4/20110032100000000061:000141200000000082:000000100000000013:000000100000000014:000010310000000055:0000386100000000186:000131712300000000367:003073234300000000798:0003123722000000000749:0010927123000000005210:003081792000000003911:003481484100000004212:0025430122000000005513:00821822151000000006614:00321415212000000005715:00231525123000000006016:00521329125000000006617:0033102171000000004518:0053171471000000004719:0021917112000000004220:001241660000000002921:000231161000000002322:000161031000000002123:001003000000000048/5/20110002100000000031:001001300000000052:000001000000000013:000000200000000024:000001110000000035:0000464100000000156:000121216200000000337:0034143715200000000758:0011153113300000000649:0053152072000000005210:00411424112000000005611:00341627142000000006612:0032729155000000006113:00211521123000000005414:003272393000000004715:00326211030000000045 Horicon During Test Direction 2RSG Count Time< 1516 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total16:0012111783000000004217:0041129111000000003818:001271992000000004019:0010819130000000004120:001091040000000002421:000061240000000002222:000031162000000002223:0000591000000000158/6/20110004210000000071:000011000000000022:000011100000000033:000001000000000014:000000100000000015:000041200000000076:0000255000000000127:0030497000000000238:001271510200000000379:000251282000000002910:0025101991000000004611:00501426115000000006112:003161883000000003913:0011819131000000004314:0000817144000000004315:00031417184000000005616:003059130000000003017:0021416102000000003518:00001012111000000003419:001271562000000003320:005371242000000003321:00317940000000002422:00015520000000001323:0001532000000000118/7/20110222200000000081:000020100000000032:000002000000000023:000002000000000024:000003300000000065:000004310000000086:0010281100000000137:00216118000000000288:0010484200000000199:0040111752000000003910:000251162000000002611:0086112551100000005712:00103151451000000004813:0010118100000000003014:0024721132000000004915:0004525131000000004816:001331773000000003417:006281321000000003218:0002215132000000003419:001251580000000003120:00008641100000002021:00004861000000001922:00102740000000001423:000104300000000088/8/20110014200000000071:000000200000000022:000010100000000023:000000100000000014:000003100000000045:0000263200000000136:000031514200000000347:0020114127300000000848:0051152718300000000699:0040817145000000004810:00101221151100000005111:00201725111000000005612:0053131970000000004713:00121817101000000004914:00141221113000000005215:00331521123000000005716:001612261040000000059 Horicon During Test Direction 2RSG Count Time< 1516 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total17:0037142462000000005618:003381382000000003719:0011141770000000004020:002014990000000003421:000021241000000001922:00216270000000001823:0000074000000000118/9/20110011210000000051:000012000000000032:000000000000000003:000001300000000044:000003100000000045:000024300000000096:000042317300000000477:0051103431310000000858:0022143516200000000719:0001722103100000004410:0044920161000000005411:00011525111000000005312:0073241983000000006413:0073162071000000005414:0033122852000000005315:0010000000000000116:0000000000000000017:00004842000000001818:0033101890000000004319:000181463000000003220:00148620000000002121:00215751000000002122:00002531000000001123:000013100000000058/10/20110020200000000041:000101100000000032:000001100000000023:000001300000000044:000001100000000025:0000056000000000116:000021415400000000357:003083331300000000788:002173628410000000799:0020717144000000004410:00011024142110000005311:0002723100000000004212:0025122692000000005613:0034162071000000005114:0000141982000000004315:00061116112000000004616:00511127113000000005817:00131524132100000005918:00321017132000000004719:002032132000000003120:0012212113000000003121:00014940010000001922:00022344000000001523:000024110000000088/11/20110103300000000071:000003200000000052:000001000000000013:000001000000000014:000011300000000055:0000255300000000156:001051113100000000317:002054119300000000708:0021103117300000000649:0003818110000000004010:0033191890000000005211:0015181982000000005312:0020721141000000004513:0021932102100000005714:002251961000000003515:0010121774000000004116:0001122092200000004617:002213171430000000051 Horicon During Test Direction 2RSG Count Time< 1516 - 2021 - 2526 - 3031 - 3536 - 4041 - 4546 - 5051 - 5556 - 6061 - 6566 - 7071 - 7576 - 999Total18:00111520172100000005719:0014923122000000005120:000289101000000003021:002071150000000002522:000011091000000002123:0000084300000000158/12/20110001510000000071:000003300000000062:000001100000000023:000004200000000064:000012110000000055:0000085100000000146:000021518000000000357:003272727200000000688:00111027221010000000729:00621027173000000006510:00131330114000000006211:004218311320000000070 Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Study  October 2011  APPENDIX D    RESIDENTS’ QUESTIONNAIRE  Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Pilot Test Resident feedback Questionnaire ID: 101 I saw an immediate difference in the speeding cars the day it was put down. Thank you. My main concern is people running the west/east Lincoln and Crandall stop signs. It is a four-way intersection in desperate need of traffic control and cross walks. My dog was killed by someone running the stop signs in front of 32 Lincoln. Since the stripes were pull ed up I have seen and heard more drivers running th at stop sign. What will happen when small children att ending Kensington School cross that intersection at 8 am? That’s prime time for speeders. 15 years ago, my children played in the street. Due to speeders children now have to take precautions just to cross the street. ID: 104 1. There were no very many children about; several fam ilies were away during the temporary striping. 2. The crosswalks by the church was very positive, it should remain in place. 3. When school starts this fall, most of the children will be walking west. Stanford Street School is closed. It would be helpful to add crosswalks at th e western end of Lincoln Avenue. ID: 106 Cars parking at crosswalks may have decreased, but they have moved further down Lincoln West. ID: 107 This did not change any parking from businesses on the street in front of private homes ID: 108 Without the stripes it seems to be used as a quick cut through, while the stripes were down most drive rs seemed to slow down and pay attention. ID:109 Speed bumps – less expensive? ID: 110 We liked the crosswalk striping and the brighter st op line at Lincoln and Crandall. Only major arteries (Glen St, etc) have the parking striping, and felt is detracted aesthetically from the street and made it seems more commercial. Not stopping fully at Cranda ll St. stop sign appears to be a bigger problem than speeding. ID: 111 I like the striping and feel. It was a positive and hope it stays. Any lines on the road that make the motorist more aware of the road and hopefully their speed is a good thing. Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Pilot Test Resident feedback Questionnaire ID: 113 Another big issue is people not stopping at stop signs at both intersections. Crandall & Lincoln and Kensington & Lincoln ID: 115 I think that the crosswalk works well. The speed ga uge in front of the church was helpful. I appreciate all the work that is done. I myself have made a conscio us decision to slow down. 30 mph is too fast in a city with lots of kids. Maybe alternatively one way stre ets throughout the city would manage traffic speed. ID: 117 I am outraged that we are spending money on “tempor ary striping” on our streets, these mailings and a company to study this “problem”. We live in the cit y of Glens Falls. Cities have traffic. If you do not want moderate to heavy traffic on the street you reside – move to the suburbs preferably on a cul-de-sac. I have lived here for 13 years and have not ever ta ken issue with traffic, speeders or people parking in from of my home. As with any road or street, there are always a few unsafe drivers who speed. The stripes on the avenue made our street appear more commercial than residential. This is counterproductive to your mission. If I were drivin g down a commercial street I’d be less cautious tha n while driving though a residential area. One good s peed bump would probably have solved the “problem” and cost less that all of this nonsense. ID: 119 Speed is still an issue. Cars travel very fast som etimes not even stopping for the stop sign on the c orner of Crandall St. We have a hearing impaired daughter ; it’s a good thing she doesn’t go near the street. I believe that many vehicles speed is due to the leng th of the block. ID: 120 No matter what we have too many cars coming and goi ng and parking in our residential area. As a homeowner it is very frustrating to see garbage str ewn daily in my yard and curb and to have to watch people sit in their cars outside my home and chat l oudly on the phone or wash their windows etc. It is RARE that I can ever park in front of my own house during the hours of 8 – 5 which is also extremely frustrating if you have guests coming or just want to drop something off. However if my car is left there overnight – of course a ticket is issued promptly. Our street is losing that “hometown” feeling. ID: 122 I reside at 39 Lincoln Ave (between Crandall and Ke nsington) so I do not know if the temporary striping encouraged drivers to slow down but I do think the wide crosswalk on the crosswalk on the corner of Davis is a good improvement. I feel the striping en tering Lincoln from Glen is a huge improvement. I noticed that driving in the parking spaces on the corner cut down greatly on the amount of drivers parking on the corner. In the time the parking spac es have been in place I saw only one driver parking on Lincoln Avenue Traffic Calming Pilot Test Resident feedback Questionnaire the corner. This improvement makes it much safer to enter Glen St and Lincoln. Thank you to everyone involved in helping to make this a safer area! ID: 123 I think the crosswalk is a definite positive; it is safer for the children and appears to slow speed somewhat. I did not have the parking striping, but it does give the street a more urban/commercial fee l. I did not think the striping was worth the (I’m gue ssing) very minor impact it may have had on the speed. I do think the striping near the orthodontis t was probably good for managing the parking issue. I think the speed limit should be 25, not 30, and it should be posted (near the church.) ID: 124 We need signs for children at play and speed limit signs. Crosswalk stripes were great. Although the amount of cars being parked was unchanged they park ed straighter and further back from Glen St. ID: 125 The stripes and a sign, for no parking from here to corner at the beginning of Lincoln where doctor’s office is. The corner is terrible during the winter months. ID: 126 Waste of money for the temporary lines. Put in a co uple of speed bumps and limiting parking to just one side of the street near Dr. Bartlett’s office would take care of 95% of the problems. You don’t need t o be too smart to figure it out. ID: 128 My areas of greatest concern are the traffic proble ms that exist at the corner of Lincoln Ave near Glen St. Cars park on the end of Lincoln which creates t he following problems. 1) When you come off Glen and turn on to Lincoln i t can be a very narrow space due to cars on either side of the street. Compounding this problem are th e cars coming on to Glen as I am turning in. In the winter when you add snow banks and people parking a way from the edge of street in order to exit their cars becomes one huge accident waiting to happen. ( maybe further the set back from “no parking to corner”). 2) When trying to exit Lincoln from Glem and cars a re parked on Lincoln and Glen it makes the visibility very difficult when trying to pull out onto Glen.

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Warren County 
Bicycle Plan 
 
 
 
Prepared by: 
 
Project Partner: 
 
 
January 2012 

  
 
 
1.   Introduction  ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………. …………………………..  1  
a.   Purpose  ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………. ……………………………..  1  
b.   Previous  Studies/Process  ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………. …….  1  
c.   Benefits  of  Bicycle  Facilities………………………………………………………………
……………………………………… …………..  1  
d.   Terminology  ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………. ……………………….  3  
2.   Existing  Conditions  ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………. …………………  4  
a.   Existing  Bike  Routes  ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………. …………….  4  
b.   Existing  Destinations  ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………. …………..  4  
3.   Priority  Connections  ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………. ……………….  6  
a.   Local  Priority  Routes  ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………. ……………  6  
b.   WCS&QBO  Priority  Rou t

es ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………. …..  6  
c.   A/GFTC  Staff  Priority  Routes  ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………. ..  7  
d.   Priority  Bicycle  Network  ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………. ………  7  
4.   Design  Standards  ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………. ……………………  8  
a.   Overview  ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………. ……………………………  8  
b.   Types  of  Bicycle  Facilities  ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………. …….  9  
5.   Physical  Feasibility  Analysis  ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………. ……  13 
6.   Imple m

entation  ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………. ……………………  14 
a.   Other  Improvements  ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………. …………  17 
b.   Partnerships  ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………. ……………………..  18 
c.   Funding  Sources  ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………. ……………….  18 
Appendix  1: Detailed  Maps ………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………. …………..  20 

Warren County Bicycle Plan 
1 
1. Introduction  
a. Purpose  
In  association  with  the  Warren  County  Safe  &  Quality  Bicycling  Organization  
(WCS&QBO),  the  Adirondack/Glens  Falls  Transportation  Council  (A/GFTC)  has  
prepared  this  Warren  County  Bicycle  Plan.  This  plan  is  intended  to  identify  
existing  conditions,  create  a  methodology  to  select  needed  improvements,  set  
priorities  for  short ‐ and  long‐ term goal s, and  facili
tate implementation  in  the  
future.  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 
facilities  in  Warren  County.  
This  plan  has  been  created  in  conjunction  with  a  public  outreach  process  which  
takes  into  account  the prio rities  of  the  loc
al municipalities  in  Warren  County.  All 
existing  community  master  plans have  been  reviewed,  stakeholder  interviews 
have  been  conducted,  and  a  public  meeting  has been  held  to  review  the  draft  
version  of  the  plan.  This  process  is  intended  to  strengthen  ties  between  the  local  
municipalities,  County  DPW, A/GFTC,  an d the  WCS&
QBO, so  that  partnerships  can 
continue  in  the  future  implementation  of the  priority  projects.   
b. Previous  Studies/Process  
This  plan  is  in  many  respects  an  update  to  the  Bicycle  and  Pedestrian  Plan  
prepared  by  A/GFTC  in  2000.  As  this  plan  was prepared  with  help  from  
WCS&QBO,  the  focus  of  th e
 up
date is  solely  on  bicycle  improvements  within  
Warren  County.  Pedestrian  systems  will  be  addressed  in  a  separate  planning  
effort;  however,  in  many  cases,  improvements  to  bicycle  facilities  will  also  benefit  
pedestrians.   
To  create  the  plan,  the  project  team  developed  a  work  plan  which  included:  
• An inventory  of  existing  conditions  
• A review  of all  available  co
mmu

nity plans  and  priorities  for  each  
municipality  in  the  County  
• Identification  of  priority  network  connections   
• A methodology  to  select  appropriate  design features,  and  
• A plan  for  implementation  
This  process  enabled  the  project  team  to  identify  feasible,  real ‐world  actions  that  
can  be taken  to  improve  bi

king  within  the  county  in  general.  By  coordinating  
implementation  across  local, county,  and state  levels,  it  is  hoped  that  the  plan  will 
increase  the  efficiency  and  efficacy  of  improvements  to  the  bicycle  network.  
c. Benefits  of  Bicycle  Facilities 
Biking,  whether  conducted  as  a mode  of  transportati on 
or as
 a  recreational  
activity,  offers  a  wide  variety  of  personal,  social,  and  environmental  benefits.  On a  
personal  level,  biking  is  not  only  a  method  to  become  or  stay  physically  active,  but  
is  also  an  affordable,  fun transportation  method  available  to all  ages.  Socially,  
Bicycle Plan  Goal:   
Provide  a  framework  for  
future  improvements  
which  will  result  in  a  
more  expansive  and  
comprehensive  network  
of  bicycle  facilities  in  
Warren  County.  

Warren County Bicycle Plan 
2 
biking  reduces  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  can  be  an  
effective  way  to  reduce  dependence  on  the  automobile,  and  subsequently  reduce 
carbon  emissions.  In creasing  opportuni

ties  for  cycling  can  potentially  increase  the  
associated  benefits, which  include:  
Economic  Development:  Investing  in  bicycle  infrastructure  can  attract  
tourists  to  an  area,  where  they  might  otherwise  spend  their  vacation  
dollars  elsewhere.  One  example  is  North  Carolina’s  Outer  Banks,  which  
generates  $60  million  annually  in  economic  activity  through  bi cycle 
tourism,  after  spendi

ng  $6.7  million  on  bicycle  infrastructure.  This  one ‐
time  investment  has  resulted  in an  annual nine ‐to ‐one  return.  An  analysis  
of  the  demographics  of  visitors  drawn  to  bike  on  the  Outer  Banks  shows  
that  the  bicycle  tourists  tend  to  be  affluent  (50% earning  more  than 
$100,000  a  year  and  87%  earning  more  than  $50,000)  and  educated  (40% 
with  a  maste rs or  doctoral  degre

e). Finally,  expenditures  by  the  680,000  
annual  visiting  bicyclists  support  1,400  jobs  in  the  area.
1   
On  a local  level,  it is  estimated  long ‐distance,  multi ‐day  bicycling  
vacationers  in  New  York  spend  between  $100  and $300  per day on  food, 
lodging,  and  other  items.  A  group  of  six  cyclists,  therefore,  each spending  
$250  per day on  seven ‐day  trip  would  add up  to  $10,500.
2 This  type  of 
economic  benefit  could  add  up  to  significant  revenue  for  the  region.   
Separate  from  tourism,  economic  benefits  from  increased  bicycle  
infrastructure  also  abound.  Portland,  Oregon,  well known  for  being  a  
bike ‐friendly  city,  saw  $90  million  in  bicycle ‐related  activity  in  2008.  
Almost  60  percent  of  that  activity  was  comprised  of  r etail,
 rental,
 and  
repair,  with manufacturing  and distribution,  bicycle  events,  and 
professional  services.
3 
Bike  trails  can  also  raise  the  value  of  nearby  homes.  According  to  a  study  
completed  for  the  Delaware  Department  of  Transportation,  proximity to  
an  off ‐road  bike  trail  can  raise  the  value  of a  home  by 4%  or more.
4 This  
supports  the  idea  that  more  and  more  people  are  seeking  to  live  in  
bikeable  communities.   
Quality  of  Life:  An  increase  in  cycling  is  often  associated  with an  
increased  quality  of  life.  Numerous  intangible  benefits  are  associated  with 
bicycling  and  walking.  Having  safe, accessible  bicycle  facilities  can  provide 
children  and families  with  another  option  for  recrea tion
 or  
                                                           
 1  Lawrie,  et  al, “Pathways  to  Prosperity:  the economic  impact  of  investments  in  bicycling  facilities,”  N.C.  Department  of 
Transportation  Division  of  Bicycle  and Pedestrian  Transportation,  Technical Report,  July  2004.  
http://www.ncdot.org/transit/bicycle/safety/safety_economicimpact.html
 2  “Bicyclists  Bring  Business  – A  Guide  for  Attracting  Bicyclists to  New  York’s  Canal  Communities,”  Erie  Canalway  National Heritage  
Corridor,  Parks  &  Trails  New  York,  and  New  York  State  Canal  Corporation,  2010.  
http://www.ptny.org/pdfs/canalway_trail/b3/Bicyclists_bring_business.pdf
 3 Alta  Planning  +  Design,  “Bicycle ‐related  Industry  Growth  in  Portland,”  September  2008  (updated  from  June  2006.)  
http://www.altaplanning.com /App_Content/files/fp_docs/2008%20Portland%20Bicycle ‐Related%20Economy%20Report.pdf 4 Racca,  David P.  and  Dhanju,  Amardeep,  “Property  Value/Desirability  Effects  of  Bike  Paths  Adjacent  to Residential  Areas,”  Center  
for  Applied  Demography  &  Survey  Research,  November  2006.  http://128.175.63.72/projects/DOCUMENTS/bikepathfinal.pdf 
Figure  1  ‐ Bicycle  tourists  (photo  courtesy  of  
Dauset  Trails  Nature  Center)  

Warren County Bicycle Plan 
3 
transportation.  According to the  Pedestrian  and  Bicycle  Information  
Center,  “Providing  more  travel  options  can  increase  a  sense  of  
independence  in  seniors,  young  people,  and  others  who  cannot  or  choose 
not  to  drive.  Increased  levels  of  bicycling  and  walking  can  have  a  great  
impact  on  an  area’s  sense of  livability  by  creating  safe and  friendl y places  
for  people  to  live  and work.”  A  spe

cific  example  comes  again  from   
Portland,  where  policies  to  encourage  bicycling  have  reduced  auto ‐
dependency,  saving the residents  on  transportation  costs.  In  comparison  
with  the  median  American  city,  Portland  residents  save  $2.6  billion  a  year  
in  terms  of  miles  traveled  and  hours  spent  in  vehicles.
3 
Transportation:  With  the  exception  of  recreational  riders,  every  cyclist  
represents  one  less  car on the  road.  Although  many  vehicle  trips  are  less 
than  three  miles  in  length,  which  could  easily  be  accomplished  by  most  
cyclists,  72  percent  of  these  short  trips  are  made  in  cars.  Bicyclists  in 
some  areas may arrive  at  their  destina t

ions faster  than if they  had  driven  
a  car,  since  they  can  often  bypass  congestion  and  gridlock  traffic.5 
Public  Health:  Cycling  is  a  great  form  of  exercise,  reducing the  risks  for 
many  cardiovascular  diseases.  Enabling  and  encouraging  residents  to  
bicycle  also  results  in  public  health benefits.  For example,  according  to 
the  American Heart  Association,  with  each  dollar  a  community  invests  in 
multi ‐use  trails,  $3  in medical  cost  savings  is  realize d
.6  
With  all  these  benefits,  many  communities  are  demonstrating  a  strong  interest  in 
strengthening  and  improving  bicycle infrastructure,  on  both  a  local  and  regional  
level.  Warren  County,  and  the  communities  within,  has  been  active  in  pursuing  
ways  to  directly  and indirectly  improve the  biking  experience  in  the  region.  This  
has  included  innovative  partnerships
 to  promote  bi
ke education  and  events  as 
well  as physical  projects  such  as  the  Warren  County  Bikeway.  With  this  plan,  
Warren  County  is  underscoring  its  ongoing  commitment  to encouraging  bicycle 
activity  for  the  benefit  of  residents,  business owners,  and visitors  alike.  
d. Terminology  
Throughout  this plan,  a  variety  of  spe cific
 terms
 are  used.  To  reduce  confusion,  a  
short  glossary  has been  provided:  
Bike  Routes:
 The  alignments  (on ‐ or  off ‐road)  along  which  bicycles  are  specifically 
accommodated,  as  designated  by  the  authority  of  the  roadway  owner.  Bike  
routes  typically  feature  directional  and/or  informational  route  markings.  Note:  
Roadway  not specifically  designated  as  a “bike  route”  does  not  imply  that  it  
cannot  or  should  not  be  used  by cyclists.  However,  some  cyclists  may  find  that  
non ‐designa

ted  roadways  are not  as  accommodating  to  cyclists.  
                                                           
 5  Pedestrian  and  Bicycle  Information  Center, “National  Bicycling  and  Walking  Study: 15–Year  Status  Report”,  May  2010  
http://katana.hsrc.unc.edu/cms/downloads/15 ‐year_report.pdf  
6 Weintraub,  William  S.  et  al, “Value  of  Primordial  and  Primary  Prevention  for  Cardiovascular  Disease  :  A  Policy  Statement  From  
the  American  Heart  Association,”  Circulation, online  publication  July 25, 2011  
http://http//circ.ahajournals.org/c ontent/early/2011/07/25/CIR.0b013e3182285a81 
Important Terms: 
Bike  ROUTE:  The  on ‐ 
or  off ‐road  alignment  
designated  specifically 
as  accommodating  to  
bicycles.   
Bike  FACILITY:
 The  
physical  surface  or  
feature  used  by 
cyclists.  

Warren County Bicycle Plan 
4 
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  Section 
4  of  this  plan.  Bike  facilities  can  also  include  other  features  desi g
ned to  
accommodate/encourage  cycling,  such  as  bike  parking  facilities.  
Design  Standards:
 The  geometric  specifications  regarding  pavement  width  and  
other  elements  which  are  recommended  to  be  met  in  order  to be  considered  a  
bicycle  facility.   
2. Existing  Conditions   
This  plan  is  intended  to  guide  the  improvement  of  bicycle  facilities  and  the  future  
designation  of  bicycle  routes  throughout  the County.  However,  this  effort  is  not  
“starting  from scratch”,  bu

t  is  rather  the  continuation  of many  years  of  work  by  
several  agencies.  Warren  County,  along  with  A/GFTC,  local  bike groups,  and  
individual  municipalities,  has  been  active  in  encouraging  accommodations  for  
cyclists.  It  is  therefore  important  to take  stock  of  the  conditions  for  cyclists  as 
they  sta nd  today.   
a. Existing  Bike  Rout

es 
Bicycle  facilities  in  Warren  County  consist  of  on ‐road  designated  routes and  multi ‐
use  trail  systems.  (See  map  1)  The  centerpiece  of  this  system  is  the  Warren  
County  Bikeway,  a mainly  off ‐road  bike  facility  which  extends  from  the  City  of  
Glens  Falls  to  the  Village  of  Lake  George .
 This  paved  tr
ail provides  access  to many 
important  destinations  and  also  links  with  the  Feeder  Canal  Trail  via on ‐road  
connections.   In  addition  to  the  facilities  shown  in  Map  1,  other  on ‐road  facilities  
feature  “Share  the  Road”  or  other  bicycle ‐related  signage.   
The  Town  of  Queensbury  rec
ently designated  several  roadways  in  the  southwest  
part  of  the  Town  as  on‐street  Bicycle  Routes.  The  identification  of  these  roadways  
as  potential  bike  routes  was  facilitated  by  WCS&QBO  prior  to the  commencement  
of  this  plan;  the  designation  process  described  in  Section  6 of  this  plan  can  serve  
as  a model  for other  towns  as
 well.  
There  are  also  other  bicycle  route  networks  and  facilities  surrounding  Warren  
County,  especially  in  Saratoga,  Washington,  and  Hamilton  Counties.  These include 
networks  such  as  the  Saratoga  County  Heritage  Trail,  New  York State  Bike Route  
#9,  the Champlain  Canal  Trail,  and  the  “Bike  the  Byways”  network .
 Creating  and  
maintaini

ng  strong  connections  to  these  neighboring  opportunities  is  a  key  aspect 
of  this  plan.  
b. Existing  Destinations  
Warren  County  has  a  variety  of  potential  destinations  for  bike  trips.  (See  Map 1)  
Many  of  the  hamlet  areas,  shown  in  pink  on Map  1,  serve  as  centers  of  activity  for  
residents  and  visitors.  Stan d‐alone

  employment  centers are  located  throughout  
the  County,  including  industrial  parks  and  the  Warren  County  Municipal  Center.  
Schools  also  constitute  important  bicycle  destinations.  Finally,  many  of  the  

Warren County Bicycle Plan 
5 
recreational  amenities  and  parks  in  the  County  are  also  biking  destinations,  both  
for  tourists  and  for  employees.  These  include  active  recreation  amenities,  such  as 
amusement  parks,  shopping,  and  cultural  features  located  in  and  around  the  city,  
village,  and  hamlets,  as  well  as passive  parks  and  natural  areas  spread  throughout  
the  County.     

Æ
bÆ
b
Æ
b
Æ
b
Æ
b
^
_k
®q
®q
®q
ñ
ñ
ñ
ñ
ñ
ñ ñ
ñ
ñ
ñ ñ
ñ
ñ
ñ
ñ
kk
k
k kk
kk
k
k
k
k k
k
k
kk
k k
k
k
k
k
k k
kk k
k
k
k
k
k kkk
k
k
k
k
k
k k
k
k
k
k k
k
Bolton
S T
ATE
ROUTE
9
N^ _
Johnsburg
Hague
Chester
Thurman
Horicon
Stony Creek
Queensbury
Warrensburg
Lake Luzerne
Lake
George
Glens Falls
§
¨ ¦87
§
¨ ¦87
STATE ROUTE 8
STATE ROUTE 28
MAIN ST
STATE ROUTE 9
STATE ROUTE 9
STATE ROUTE 8
.
Map 1 – Bike Routes and Destinations
No Scale
Legend
kPublic Schools
ñGovernment Office
^
_Major Retail Center
Æ
bRail Station
Bike Routes
On-Road Bike Connections
Feeder Canal P ark Heritage Trail
Warren County Bikeway
Waterbodies
Parks (Local)
Hamlet Area (APA Designation)
^
_k
®q
ñ
ñ
ñ
ñ
k
k
k
k k
k
k
kk
k
k k
k
k
k k
k
k
k
k
k
k
k
^
_
Saratoga
Ridge RdBay StGlen St
Sherman Ave
Broad St
South St
DIX Ave
Warren St
Lake
George
§
¨ ¦87
§
¨ ¦87
STAT E ROUT E 9
Inset Area

Warren County Bicycle Plan 
6 
3. Priority  Connections  
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  facilities  in 
Warren  County.  Most  of  these  facilities  are  likely  to  be  located  along  existing  
roadways.  However,  it  is  not  realistic  to  assume  that every  roadway  will  be  the  
focus  of  bi

cycle  improvement  projects,  especially  given  current  funding  
limitations.  Conversely,  even  if  a  roadway  meets  the  minimum  requirements  for  
the  appropriate  design standard,  there  may  be  reasons  to refrain  from  pursuing  
designation  as  a bicycle  route,  at  least  in  the  short ‐term.  Possible  reasons  to del ay 
designati

ng  a  roadway  as  a bicycle  route  include:  location  (does the  roadway  
provide  connections  to  other  bike  routes?);  maintenance  (will  the  bicycle  facility  
require  a  level  of  maintenance  which  is  currently  not feasible?);  and/or public 
input  (are  there  local  objections  to  formal  designation  as a bike  route?).   
  As  such,  an im p

ortant component  of  this  plan  involved  setting priorities  to  
identify  which  roadways  are recommended  to  be  designated  as  bike  routes.  To  
set  realistic  and feasible  actions  for  this  plan,  several  factors  were  considered,  
described  in greater  detail  below.   
a. Local  Priority  Routes  
Many  of  the  local  municipalities  have  a ddressed
 the  need  for  bicy
cle facilities  in  
planning  documents;  these  ideas  should  be  taken  into  account.  As  part  of  this  
plan,  all  local  planning  documents  were  reviewed  to  determine  the  stated  bicycle  
transportation  priorities  in  each  municipality.  On  Maps  2  and  3,  the  roadways 
shown  in  red  were  specifically  mentioned  within  the  individual  mu
nicipal plan  as 
being  suitable  for  current  bike  use,  or  desired  for  bike  use in  the  future.   
This  analysis  highlights  the  fact  that  not every  community  in  Warren  County  has  
stated  priorities  concerning  cycling.  Some communities  have  identified  specific  
on ‐ and  off ‐road  alignments,  while  others  include  a  gen eral
 statement  of  su
pport 
for  bicycling  issues.  Still  others  make  no  mention  of  cycling  at  all;  however,  this  
should  not  infer  that  the  community  does  not  desire  accommodation  of  bicycles  
on  the  roadways.  Nothing  in  this  plan  is  intended  to  prevent  local  municipalities  
from  supporting  the establishment  of  additional  bicycle  facilities,  nor  to obligate  
commu nities to  engage  in  projects  in  the  future.   

 
b. WCS&QBO  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, members  of the  
WCS&QBO  generated  a  list  of  cycling  routes.  These  road ways represent  the  
alignme

nts  of  existing  bike  events,  important  connections  to  recreation  
destinations,  and  roadways  which are  enjoyable  to  ride.  Although  recreational  
riding  is not  the  focus  of  this  plan,  it  is  important  to  recognize  those  routes  which  
are  favored  by  the  biking  community.  These  routes  are  shown  in  gold  on  Maps  2  
and  3.  
 
Local  Priorities:  Many  
municipalities  have  
specifically  addressed  
bicycle  facilities  in  their  
planning  documents,  
including:  
• Bolton  
• Chester  
• Horicon 
• Johnsburg  
• Town  and  Village  
of  Lake  George  
• Lake  Luzerne  
• Queensbury  
• Warrensburg  

Warren County Bicycle Plan 
7 
c. A/GFTC  Staff  Priority  Routes   
In  addition  to the  priorities  stated  above,  it  will  be  important  to  include  regional  
transportation  needs  into  this  bicycle  plan.  A/GFTC  staff  therefore  identified  
several  roadway  alignments  which  fulfill  a  regional  transportation  role.  These  
include  connections  to  destinations  within  Warren  County,  as  well  as  bike  routes  
in  adjacent  counties.  Thes e

  routes,  shown in  green  on  Maps  2  and  3,  were  
selected  to  allow  for transportation  connectivity,  rather  than just  recreational  
enjoyment.   
d. Priority  Bicycle  Network  
As  part  of  this  plan,  a  methodology  to  prioritize  the  importance  of roadway  
improvements  was  developed.  Using  this methodology,  the Priority  Network  was  
developed.  Se e
 Maps  2  &  3,  as

  well  as the  more  detailed  maps for  each  
municipality  located  in  Appendix  1. This  includes  on ‐ and  off ‐road  connections  
which  are  proposed  to  be  the  focus  of  bicycle  improvements  in  the  future.  
Showing  the  needs  and  desires  of all  three  groups  simultan eously allows  for  a  
rudime

ntary  hierarchy  to  be  assigned.   
1. On ‐Road  Connections:
  Roadways  which  have  been  selected  by  all  three  
groups  are  considered  high  priority.  Whenever  feasible,  upgraded  bicycle 
facilities  such  as  bike  shoulders  or  shared  use  lanes  should  be  included  in 
improvement  projects  on  these  high  priority  routes.  Those  routes  
selected  by  two  of the  three  groups  are  considered  still important,  but  of  
a  lower  priority for  im

plementation.   If feasible,  bicycle  facilities  should  be  
included  in  any  upcoming  capital  improvement  projects.  If  bicycle  
facilities  cannot  be  accommodated,  “Share  the  Road”  signage  may be 
recommended  to raise  awareness  of cyclists  on  the  part  of  motorists.  
Roadways  which  are  important  to  only  one  group  are  inclu ded in
 this  plan  
as  well,  with  the  understanding  that  improvements  along  these  roadways 
may  take  place  in the  long ‐term.  
2. Multi ‐use  trails:
 In  terms  of  off ‐road  connections,  only those  previously  
proposed  in local  planning  documents  have  been  added  to  the  priority  
connections  map.  However,  many  other  multi ‐use  trails  may  be  feasible.  
If  pursuing  an off ‐road  connection  is  the  preferred  alternative,  the  need  
to  acquire  easements  or  rights ‐of ‐way  should  be  the  initial  consid eration.  
Trail

  alignments  through  recreation/open  space  areas  may  be  a  feasible  
option  which  minimizes  property  acquisition  burdens. In  addition,  
National  Grid  has  a  standard  process  and  dedicated  staff to  evaluate 
whether  they  will  grant  access  rights  for  multi ‐use  trails,  making  them 
another  potential  partner.   
This  hierarchy  is intend ed to  provide
 one  tool  in  the  decision ‐making  process.  It  
may  be  useful  in situations  in  which  there  is  some  leeway  in  selecting  among  
several  potential  projects. However,  the  selection  of  capital  projects  involves  
other  equally  important  factors.  The  remainder  of  this  plan  is  intended  to  address 
the  design,  f easibility,  and  i
mplementation of  bicycle  improvement  projects.  

DIAMOND POINT RD
GOL F C OURSE RD
SCHROON RIVER RD
PAD ANARUM RD
HARRISB URG RD
Johnsburg
Bolton
Hague
Chester
Thurman
Horicon
Stony CreekQueensbury
Warrensburg
Lake Luzerne
Lake
George
Glens
Falls
BAY RD
CALL ST
LAKE AVE
GLEN ATHOL RD
HIGH ST
STATE ROUTE 9ATATEKA DR
RIDGE RD
E RIVER DR
RIDGE RD
ROUTE 9
STA T
E
ROUT E
8
STATE ROUTE 28
LAKE SHORE DR
E S
HORE DR
WALL ST
VALENTIN E
P
OND RD
S TATE ROUTE
9
RIVER RD
STATE ROUTE 8
S T
A T
E ROUTE
2 8
.
Map 2 – Priorities for Bicycle Facilities
No Scale
Legend
Existing Warren County Bikeway
Bike Routes
Proposed Off-Road Trails
WCS&QBO Priority Routes
Local Priority Routes
A/GFTC Staff Priority Routes
Waterbodies

MUR RAY
VETERANS RD
RICHARDS ON
QU AKER AVE
RID GE RD
UPPER SH ERMAN AVE
BAY RD
HAVILAND RD
BAY ST
PO TTER RD
WEST MO UNTAIN RD
GURNEY LN
LUZERNE RD
CRONIN RD
DIXO N RD
AVIATION RD
COUNTRY CLUB RD
CORINTH RD
DIX AVE
WE
S
T MO U
NTAIN RDSTATE ROUTE 9
GLEN ST
STATE ROUTE 149
R
IDGE ST
BROAD ST
WARREN ST
BOULEVARD
C H
E
STNUT RIDGE RD
.
Map 3 – Priorities for Bicycle Facilities (Inset)
No Scale
Legend
Existing Warren County Bikeway
Bike Routes
Proposed Off-Road Trails
WCS&QBO Priority Routes
Local Priority Routes
A/GFTC Staff
Priority Routes
Waterbodies

Warren County Bicycle Plan 
8 
4. Design  Standards  
a. Overview  
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  part  of  an  on ‐road  facility  or  an  multi ‐use  trail.   
The  selection  of  a  bicycle  facility  depends  on  many  va riables:  the  type
 of  cyclist  
likely  to  use  the  facility;  traffic 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  
select  th

e  most  appropriate  design  standards  for  each  facility.  
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  minimum  standards  for  the  
types  of  facilities  most  like ly
 to  be  proposed
 in  Warren  County.  The design  
standards  are  based  on  those  in  the  NYSDOT  Highway Design  Manual  Chapter  17 
(Bicycle  Facility  Design),  and  on  AASHTO’s  Guide  for  the Development  of  Bicycle  
Facilities . Standards  for  features  such  as  bridges  or  railings  have  not  been  
included;  refer  to  the  appropriate  gui
dance document  for  detail  concerning  these  
facilities.   
This  summary  is  not  intended  to  limit  the range  of  potential  bicycle  facilities  in  
Warren  County.  As  new  standards  are  adopted,  and  different  types  of  bicycle  
facilities  tested  and  deployed,  it  is  recommended  that  these  new  techniques  be  
reviewed  to  determine  if  they  may  be  appropriate  to condi tions in  Warren  
County.   
 
 
   
Guidance Documents 
for  Bicycle  Facility 
Design  Standards:  
American  Association  of 
State  Highway  and  
Transportation  Officials  
(AASHTO):  Guide  for  the 
Development  of  Bicycle  
Facilities , 1999 
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  Facili ty 
Design, 
2006 

Warren County Bicycle Plan 
9 
b. Types  of  Bicycle  Facilities  
1. Bike  Shoulders  (aka  Wide  Shoulders)  
Most  appropriate  for:  Rural/suburban  roadways  with limited  
sections  of  curbing  and  without  on ‐street  parking  
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.  (See  Figure  2&3)  
 
Advantages:   
• Many  bike  shoulders  already  exist in  the  County  
• 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  (see  page  10)  
• May  require  widening  of the  roadway  in  certain  areas 
• Can pose  conflict  with on ‐street  parking  
 
  
4’ Shoulder –
no  curbTravel  Lane –
width variesTravel  Lane –
width varies6’ Shoulder  –  
with   curb
Figure  3  ‐ Bike  shoulders  (photo  courtesy  of  ANCA) 
Figure
 2  ‐  Design  Standard  for  bike  shoulders  

Warren County Bicycle Plan 
10 
2. Shared‐ Use Lanes  (a.k.a.  Wide Curb Lanes) 
Most  appropriate  for:  Roadways  with  width  constraints  
Design  standards:  14’ ‐wide  desired/12’ ‐wide  minimum  travel  
lane  (See Figure  4&5).  Some  shared ‐use  lanes  deploy  a  
“sharrow”  roadway  striping, which  reinforces  the  need  to  
share  the  road  with  cyclists. 
 
Advantages:   
• Minimal  striping  or  mainte nance requir
ed 
• Benefits  to  non ‐bicycle  traffic:  accommodates  buses  and  
truck  turning  movements/emergency  maneuvers 
• Greater  lateral  mobility  for  advanced  cyclists  (can  use  the 
whole  lane  if  needed  to  avoid  obstacles)    
Disadvantages:   
• Least  comfortable  for  beginning/average  cyclists 
• Wider  travel lanes  can  increase  traffic  speeds  
• Can pose  con flict  with  on ‐s
treet parking  
 
  
Figure  5  ‐ Example  of  cyclist  in  shared  lane  (photo  courtesy  
of  pedbikeinfo.org)  
Figure 4  ‐  Design  Standard  for  shared  lanes  
14’ desired 
travel  lane Shared  
travel  lane Parking 
lane 
(width  
varies)  
22’ minimum

Warren County Bicycle Plan 
11 
3. Bike  Lanes  
 
Most  appropriate  for:  Urban  roadways  with curbing  and  on ‐
street  parking 
 
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.  (Figure 6)  
 
Advantages:   
• Channelizes  bike  traffic  
• More  comfortable  for begi nning/average 
cy
clists to  ride   
• Minimizes  cars  swerving  into  other  lane  to avoid  cyclists  
• Higher  profile/visibility  for  cyclists   
 
Disadvantages:   
• Intersections  can  become  complicated  with  extra  bike  
lane  striping  and  signage  (Figure  7) 
• May  require  additional  ROW width  
• Mainly  an  urban  roadway  feature  
• Can be  blocked  by parke d
 cars   
•

Can  pose  conflict  with on ‐street  parking  
 
4. 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  pote ntial
 for  vehicl
e/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  
 
  
Figure  6  ‐ Striped  bike  lane  (photo  courtesy  of  pedbikeinfo.org)  
Figure 7  ‐ Example  of  bike  lane  signage  
Figure 8  – Multi ‐Use  trail  

Warren County Bicycle Plan 
12 
5. “Share  the  Road”  Signage  
 
Most  appropriate  for:  Roadways  which  do  not  have  sufficient  
shoulder  width  to  support  designated  use for  bicycles.  Note 
that  the  signs  themselves  do  not  constitute  a  bicycle  facility,  
but  can  be  deployed  along  on ‐road  connectors.  
 
Design  standards:  Set  by  the  Manual  of  Uniform  Traffic  
Control  Devices  (MUTCD)   
 
Advantages:   
• Inexp ensive 
to deploy  
•

No physical  changes  needed  to  roadway  
• Roadway  need not  be  a  designated  Bike  Route  to have  
Share  the  Road  signs 
 
Disadvantages:   
• Does  not  provide  dedicated  space  for  cyclists  
• Over‐deployment  dilutes  the  efficacy  of  the  signs  
   
Figure 9  ‐  Diagram  of Share  
the  Road  signage  

Warren County Bicycle Plan 
13 
5. 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  Warren  County,  this  plan  also  analyzed  whether roadways  may currently  have  
the  requisite  pavement  width  meet  the  Design  Standard  appropriate  to the  
context.  A  GIS  map  was  prepared  wh
ich compares  the  existing  shoulder  width  to 
the  width  required  by  the  bike  shoulders  Design  Standards  outlined in  Section  4.7 
This  assumption  creates  a  conservative  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  enough  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,  the  average  paved  
shoulder  width  was  measured  for  each  section  of  roadway.   Gravel  shoulders  
were  not  in cl

uded  in  this  analysis.  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  should  be  noted  that  the  posted  speed limit  is  not  
the  only  factor  which  can  be  taken  into  accou
nt 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  be taken  
into  account  to  determine  an  appropriate  bike  shoulder  width.   Posted  speed  was 
chosen  as the  analysis  method  for  th is pl
an to  facilitate  the GIS  analysis.     
The  results  of  this  analysis  are  shown  in  Map  4,  which  indicates  that  the majority  
of  roadways  do not  have  current  sufficient  width to  meet  the  wide  shoulder  
Design  Standard.  It is  crucial  to  note  that  lack  of  shoulder  width  does  not  im ply  
that  a  roadway  is  inher

ently  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)  the  appropriate  design  standard.  This  
information  can  be  useful  in  helping  roadway  owners  determine  the  scope  of  
work  required  to  create  or  enhan c

e  bicycle  facilities  in  the  future.   
It  must  also  be  noted  that  many  roadways  in  Warren  County  are  “user  highways”.  
These  are roadways  in which  the  right ‐of ‐way  width  is  the  same  as the  pavement  
width.  As  such,  widening  these  types  of  roads  usually  involves  acq u
isition of  
property  from  adjacent  landowners,  which can  significantly  increase  the cost  and  
time  frame  of  construction  projects.   
   
                                                           
 7  Not  all  roadways  on  the  priority  network  were analyzed  during  the  course  of this  
mapping  analysis.  

JohnsburgBolton
Hague
Chester
Thurman
Horicon
Stony Creek
Queensbury
Warrensburg
Lake Luzerne
Lake
George
Glens Falls
L A KE
S H
O
RE

D R
B A
Y R D
C
A
LL
S T
L
A K
E
A
V E
H
A R
R
IS B
UR G
R D
G
L
E N
ATH
O L

RD
S TA
TE
R O
UT
E
2 8
H
IG
H
S T
F
R I
E N D
S
L A
K E
R D
PA
L
IS
A D
ES
R
D
E S
H
O RE
D
R
M AI
N
S TSTA
TE
R O
U
TE

9
W AR
R E
N S
B U
R G
R
D
ST
A T
E
R
O UTE

8
A TA
TE KA
D
R
G O
L
F CO
URSE
R D
R
I
D G
E

R D
S
T
A TE
R O U
TE
9
N
B
EA
V E R
P
O
ND
R D
AT
HO L
R
D
CO R
I
N TH
R
D
HO
R
IC O
N
A V
E
PO
TT
E R

R D
CRO N
IN

R D
M
U
RR
AY
RD
E RIV E
R
D R
L
A KE
S
H O
R
E
D R
ST A
TE
RO
UT
E 9
L
A
KE
S H
O RE
DR
S T
A
TE R
O
UT
E
8
S TA
TE
R
O UT
E
9
R I
D G
E
R D
.
Map 4 – Physical Conditions Map
(Shoulder width vs. posted speed limit)
Legend
Shoulder Width Meets Applicable Bike Design Standard
No
Ye s
Other Roads
Waterbodies
Shoulder and posted speed conditions
based on field observation by A/GFTC
staff and may be subject to revision.
Information as presented is not to be
used for construction or engineering
and is intended for planning purposes only.
No Scale
No – Roadside Obstacles

Warren County Bicycle Plan 
14 
6. Implementation  
The  priority  network  identified  in  Section 3  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,  funding  for stand ‐
alone  on‐street  bicycle  features  is  so  limited  as  to be  essentially  
unavailable.  However, other  funding  streams  may become  available  
which  can  further  the  implementation  of  this  project.  For example,  
there  may  be  funding  for  off ‐road  connections  which  would  allow  for  
exte nsions  of  the  Warren  County  Bikeway,  or for  similar  facilities  to 
be

  constructed  in  the  County.   
• 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,  it  is  likely  that  bicycle  facilities  will  become  a  more  
prominent  element  in  the  design  and construction  of  roadways  at the  
State  and  Co unty
 level.  In  addition,  ther

e 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  take  advantage  of these  
opportuniti es as

  they  arise.   
• Phasing  of  Improvements
.  For  high ‐priority  roadways,  it may  be  
beneficial  to  adopt  a  phased  approach  to  bicycle  facility  
improvements.  For  instance,  if there  is  insufficient  pavement/right ‐
of ‐way  width  to  support  creation  of  bike  shoulders,  or if  the  roadway  
was  very recently  improved  (and  therefore  not  likely  to  be  the  focus  
of  a  capital  pr oject  in  the  near  futur
e), “Share  the  Road”  signage  can 
be  added  as  a short ‐term  solution.  This would  allow the  roadway  
owner  to designate  the  road  as  a Bike  Route  in  the  near  future,  while  
still  allowing  for  future  physical  improvements  to  take  place  in  the  
long  term.  In  addition,  ph asi
ng should  take  into account  the location  
of  the  facility.  Connections  to  existing  bike  facilities,  and  continuous  
routing  between  logical termini,  are  both  important  considerations.  
• 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  desi re to  
accommoda

te a  wide  range  of  cyclists  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, 
Complete  Streets:  
Complete  streets  provide  
transportation  options  for everyone  
by  creating  safer  places  to walk  and  
ride  bicycles.  They  also  provide  better  
access  to  public   transportation,  
improve  transit  efficiency,  and  calm  
traffic.  Complete  streets  create 
complete  communities.  
In  the  summer  of  2011,  the  NYS 
legislature  unanimously  passed  a 
statewide  Complete  Streets  bill,  which  
was  signed  by  the  governor  an

d  will  
go  into  effect  February  2012.  
This  law  calls  for  Complete  Street  
Designs  to  be  considered  for all  state,  
county,  and  local  transportation  
projects  that  are  undertaken  by  the  
Department  of  Transportation  or  
receive  both  federal  and  state  funding  
and  are  subject  to  Department  of  
Transportation  oversi

ght.  
Most  projects  that  receive  federal  
funding  also  receive  state  funding.  
However,  the  law  is  not  applicable  on  
many  roads  owned  by  villages,  towns  
and  counties.  

Warren County Bicycle Plan 
15 
location of  the  proposed  facility, and  physical  constraints  of  the  
roadway/trail  area. 
To  further  facilitate  the  decision‐ making process,  a  Bicycle  Facility  Improvement  
Process  has been  developed.  In  general,  the  end  goal  is  to  have  all  of  the  
roadways  in the  priority  network  include  a  functional  bicycle  facility.   
Theoretically,  the  roadway  owners  could  designa t
e these  roadways  as bicycle  
routes  at  any  time.  However,  most  agencies  would  prefer  that the roadways  that 
they  designate  as formal  bike  routes  meet  (or  come  close  to  meeting)  the  criteria  
for  accepted  design  standards,  such  as  those  listed  in  this  plan,  prior  to  making  
the  designation.   
The  first  step  in  that  proce s
s is  to  select  the  appropriate  Design Standards  for  the  
roadway  in  question.  The  next  step  is  to  determine  whether  the  roadway  will  
require  additional  improvements  in  order  to  be  in  compliance  with  the  Design  
Standards.  The  flow  chart  on  the  following  page  is intended  to  hel p gui
de  this  
process.  Factors  such as  existing pavement  width,  available  ROW, the feasibility  
of  off ‐road  connections,  and  whether  the  roadway  is  slated  for improvements  in  
the  5 ‐year  Transportation  Improvement  Program,  are all  considered.  
This  process  anticipates  that  most  roadway  owners  would  require  that  bicycle  
facilities  are  largely  consistent  wit

h 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  behest  of  a  separate  group. For  example,  the  
WCS&QBO  recently  petitioned  the  Town  of  Queensbury  to designate  several  
roadways  as bike  routes;  the  Town  Board  passed  a  re sol
ution designating  the 
roadways  as this  plan  was  being  drafted.  This  process  could  be  replicated  for  any  
town  in  Warren  County.  Similarly,  this  group,  or  any  local  municipality,  may  
choose  to petition  Warren  County  to  designate  their roadways  as bike  routes.   
New  York State  maintains  a  separate  system of  bike  routes,  design
ed to 
encourage  long‐ distance  connections  statewide.  However,  they  may  be  
petitioned  to  add  bike  route  signage  along  State  roadways.  These  can  then  
become  an  important  part  of  a  regional  cycling  promotion,  such  as  the  “Bike  the  
Byways”  efforts put  forth  by  the  Adirondack  North  Country  Association.   

Warren County Bicycle Plan 
16 
  
Is pavement  width  sufficient  to support  
appropriate  Design  Standard? 
Yes No 
Roadway  included  in  current  TIP?  
Yes No 
¾ Restripe  roadway 
as  part  of capital  
project  
¾ Designate  roadway  
as  a  Bike  Route; 
add  signage  
¾ Ensure  facility  will  
be  maintained,  if  
necessary  
Is restriping  necessary  to  create  appropriate  bike  
facility?  
No Yes  
¾ Designate  roadway  as  a  Bike  
Route  
¾ Add  directional/  informational  
Bike  Route  signage  
¾ Ensure  facility  will  be  
maintained,  if  necessar
y 
¾ Add  Share  the  
Road  Signage  
¾ Designate  roadway  
as  a  Bike  Route  
¾ Restripe  roadway 
as  part  of long ‐
term  road  
improvements  
Is there  sufficient  ROW available  to  widen  pavement?
No  Yes  
Yes No 
¾ Widen  roadway  as 
part  of road  
improvements  
¾ Designate  roadway  
as  a  Bike  Route;  add 
signage  
¾ Ensure  facility  will  
be  maintained  
¾
¾ Add  Share  the  Road  
Signage  
¾ Designate  roadway  as  a  
Bike  Route  
¾ Widen  roadway  as part  of 
long ‐term  road  
improvements  
Is the  roadway  included in  current  TIP?  
Could  an  off ‐road  facility  feasibly  
be  substituted?  
Yes No 
¾ Pursue  funding  for  
multi ‐use  trail  
¾ Acquire  ROW  
¾ Construct  trail 
¾ Add  Share  the  Road  
signage  
¾ Designate  roadway  as  a  
Bike  Route  
Bicycle  Facility  Improvement  Selection  Process 
START:  Determine  the  most  appropriate  design 
standard  for  the  roadway.  

Warren County Bicycle Plan 
17 
Edge of travel  
lane  
Existin
g 
Shoulder  
Pavement  Overlay:  NOT  
recommended  
Edge of travel  
lane  Shoulder  
Existin
g 
Pavement  Overlay:  Recommended
a. Other  Improvements  
The  implementation  process  outlined  above  is  intended  to  apply  to  large ‐scale  
improvement  projects,  which  would  apply  to  significant  portions of  a  roadway.  
However,  there  are also  opportunities  to  pursue  small ‐scale  improvements,  which  
could  also  improve  the  biking  experience  in  Warren  County.  These “spot”  
improvements  are  focused  on  addressin g those  small ‐scale  issues  which  may  not  
require  significant  fundi

ng  to  complete.  Several  examples  are  included  below.  
1. Drainage  grates.  The direction  of  the  grating  pattern on  storm  drains  is  
an  often ‐overlooked  detail.  (See  figure  10).  Grate  openings  which  run  
parallel  to the  travel  direction  can cause  havoc  for  thin  b i

cycle tires.  
Ideally,  grates  should  be  selected  which  feature  a “bike ‐friendly”  
pattern.  If  this  is  not  feasible,  the  grate  should  be  situated  so that  the  
pattern  runs  perpendicular  to  the  travel  direction.   
2. Individual  hazards.  Over time, potholes  and  cracks  can  form  in  
pavement,  causing  hazardous  conditions  for  cyclists.  Sudde n chan
ges in 
grade,  whether  because  of pavement  failure  or  manholes  set  at  an  
improper  elevation,  can  be difficult  for  cyclists  to  maneuver,  especially 
at  night.  In  the  short  term,  pavement  markings  as  specified  in  Chapter 
3C  of  the  Manual  for  Uniform  Traffic Control  Devices  (figure  11)  can  
help  alert cyclists  that  a  po tentially  haza
rdous condition  exists.  These 
hazards  can  then  be eliminated  or  minimized  as  the  appropriate 
roadway  or  utility  project  is  undertaken  in  the  future.  
3. Pavement  overlays.  Even  if  no  re ‐striping  or  widening  is  called  for in  a  
paving  project,  there  may still  be  good  opportuniti es to  im
prove 
conditions  for  cyclists.   Ensuring  that  the  seam  of  the  pavement  does  
not  occur  in the  middle  of  the  shoulder,  or  is  properly feathered,  will 
provide  a smooth,  regular  surface for  cyclists.  (See  figure  12)  
4. Roadway  sweeping.  Patches  of  gravel,  especially  on  corners,  can  pose  a  
threat  to  cycl ists.
 With  the  help  of  the  cycling  com
munity, it  may  be 
possible  to  identify  areas  where  significant  gravel  accumulation  is  
hampering  safe cycling.  Targeted  road  sweeping,  even  just  a  few  times  
a  year,  can  help  to  reduce  the  potential  hazards.   
5. Bicycle  Racks.  Lack of  adequate  bike  racks  is a  freq uent  issue for  
cyclists.  Although  some  co

mmunities  are  beginning  to  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.  As a  starting 
point,  bike  racks  should  be  provided  in  locations  near  public  buildings 
such  as  schools,  municipal cent
ers, and  post  offices,  as  well  as in public 
parking  areas.  Commercial  businesses and  employment  centers  should  
also  be  encouraged  to  provide  bike racks  as  a service  to  their  customers  
and  employees.   
   
Figure 10 ‐ Above,  poor  drainage  
grate  choice;  Below,  bicycle ‐
friendly  grate  (photos  courtesy  of  
Syrcast)  
Figure 11 ‐ Example  of  bike  hazard  striping  
Figure 12 ‐ Pavement  Overlays  

Warren County Bicycle Plan 
18 
b. Partnerships  
The  improvements  outlined  in  this  plan  are extensive,  and  will  take  a significant  
and  focused  effort  to  bring  about.  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  lea
d 
agencies  is  possible:  local  municipalities,  recreation  and  open  space  groups,  or  
the  WCS&QBO  itself. Any projects  which  involve  acquisition  of  easements  or  
rights ‐of ‐way  will  also  involve  the  landowners  as  a key  stakeholder.  WCS&QBO,  
along  with  A/GFTC,  will  play  important  roles  in  maintaining  open communication  
with  these  gr oups  as

  implementation  of  bicycle  improvement  projects  is  
undertaken.   
In  terms  of maintenance,  it  can  be  assumed  that  on ‐road  bike  facilities  will  be  the  
responsibility  of  whichever  agency  currently  maintains  the  roadway  itself,  unless  
other  specific  provisions  are  made.  For  multi ‐use  trails,  there  may  be  partnership 
opportuniti es to  provide  some

  or  all  maintenance  services.  This  can  take  the  
forms  of  occasional  volunteer  events, such  as  trail‐ cleaning  days,  or a  more  
formal  maintenance  agreement  between  agencies  and  groups  to  perform  
maintenance.   
In  addition,  WCS&QBO,  as  a  501(c)3  non‐profit  organization,  may  be  able  to  assist  
in  identifying  and  im plem
enting some  of the  spot  improvements  listed  in  this  
plan.  For example,  this  group  may be  able  to create  and  maintain  an  inventory  of 
individual  hazards,  and may  also be  able  to seek  funding  for the  roadway  owners  
to  address  these  concerns.  It  may  also  be  possible  to  partner  to pe rform  target
ed 
road  sweepings  or  trail  maintenance,  with  help  from the  local  and  county  DPWs.  
Sponsored  community  events  such  as  these  would  also raise  the  profile  of  the  
organization  and  provide  an  important  community  education  benefit.   
c. Funding  Sources  
The  following  funding  sources  have  historically  been  available  for projects  which  
involve  bicy cl

e  facilities.  Not all  of these  programs  are  currently  active;  
conversely,  new programs  may  arise  which  could  be  applied  towards  bicycle  
facilities.  In  selecting  funding  sources,  it  is  important  to  keep  in  mind  the  
stipulations  and  requirements  of  the  funding  agency.  For  instance,  projects  
funded  under  NYSDOT’s  Transportation  Enhancements  Program  mu st follow  the  
State’s  desi

gn,  bidding,  and  grant  reporting  process,  which  can  be  very  involved.  
  

Warren County Bicycle Plan 
19 
 
Program  Granting Agency  On‐or  Off‐
Road    Eligible
 Activities Local 
Match  
Transportation  
Enhancements  
Program   NYS
 Department  
of  Transportation  
(NYSDOT)   Both
Provision of  Facilities  for  Bicycles  and  Pedestrians  (on ‐
or  off ‐road)   Yes
Make
 the  Connection  A/GFTC   BothSmall‐scale  projects  that  improve  the  region’s  bicycle  
and  pedestrian  travel  network  Yes
Transportation,
 
Community,  System  
Preservation  
Program  (TCSP)   FHWA/NYSDOT
 On‐Road Planning, development,  and  implementation  of  
strategies  to  integrate  transportation,  community,  and  
system  preservation  plans  and  practices   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
  

Warren County Bicycle Plan 
20 
Appendix 1:  Detailed  Maps  
To  facilitate  implementation  among  individual  municipalities,  a  series  of  more  
detailed  priority  maps  has  been  prepared.  These  maps  depict  the same  content  as 
Maps  2  and  3  of  this  plan,  on  a  larger  scale. The  map  contents  include:  
Map  A:  Glens  Falls/Southern  Queensbury  
Map  B:  Lake  Luzerne  
Map  C:  Lake  George/Northern  Quee nsbury
 
Map  D:  Warrensburg  
Map  E:  Stony  Creek  
Map  F:

  Bolton 
Map  G:  Thurman  
Map  H:  Hague  
Map  I:  Horicon  
Map  J:  Chester  
Map  K:  Johnsburg  

^
_k
®qñ
ñ
ñ
ñ
ñSWEET RDI
A
Queensbury Glens Falls
Lake Luzerne
§
¨ ¦87
§
¨ ¦87
W Mounta in R d
Bay Rd
Quaker Rd
Luzerne Rd
DIX Ave
Ridge Rd
Dixon Rd
Corinth Rd
State R
out
e 9
Glen St
Hav
iland Rd
Bay St
Sanford St
Aviation Rd
Potter Rd
Upper Sherman
A ve
Ridge St
Cr
onin R
d
Meadowbrook Rd
Main St
Q u
eensbur
y Ave
W
arr
en St
Broad St
Hi
cks Rd
Ri ver StMaple St
Country Club Rd
Boulevard
Round Pond Rd
Platt St
South St
Elm St
Grant Ave
Sherman Ave
Lawrence St
G lenwood
A ve
Upper
Gl
en St
Staple St
Blind Rock R
d
Haskell Ave
Mohican St
Webster Ave
Mountain View Ln
Lower Warren St
Thomas St
Le
xi
ngto n

A v
e
Western Ave
Main St
.
Warren County Bicycle Plan
Map A – Glens Falls/South Queensbury Inset
No Scale
Legend
ñGovernment Office
®qWarren County Airport
kSUNY Adirondack
^
_Major Retail Center
kPublic Schools
Parks (Local)
Waterbodies
Bike Routes
Proposed Off-Road Trails
Warren County Bikeway
Feeder Canal Park Heritage Trail
WCS&QBO Priority Routes
Local Priority Routes
A/GFTC Priority Routes (Staff)
Other Roads
Interstate
Major Roads
Local Streets
Prepared by: A/GFTCI
AWarren County Bikeway Parking Lot

ñ
kk
k
Lake Luzerne
Queensbury
Warrensburg
Lake George
Stony Creek
L
a
k
e A
ve
S
tate Route
9
N
C a
ll
S t
R
a
lp
h R
d
How e

R d
E
R iv
er D
r
Be
art
o w
n
R d
O ld
S t
a g e
R d
V
ie l
e
P o
nd R d
G
ai
l
e y
H
ill

R d
H
al
l
H i
ll R
d
Riv
er
R d
G
l
e n s
F a
ll
s
M ou
n
ta i
n R
d
Th
o
m as
R
d
But
t e
rm
i
l
k
R d
S
c
o fi
e l
d
R d
H
ad
le
y R
d
V
an
are
L
n
La
ke
T
o u
r R
d
T
u t
h i
ll R d
G
ag e
H i
l
l R d
C
ori
n t
h R
d
Dunkle
y
R
d
Hy
la
n d
D
r
B
ay
R
d
Da
n ie
ls
R d
L
y
n ch
D
r
H arr
is
R
d
Tr
a
ve
r
R
d
B u
tl
er
P on
d
R d
7t
h
A
ve
R
ea
d
P
a
rk
R
d
Haw k
R
d
4W D
R
o
ad
M ain
S t
Te
rr
a ce D
r
Pin e
w oo
d
s
R d
M
aso n

D r
R
os
e
A v
e
S pi
er
F
all
s
R d
H
ar tm an
L
o
op
Iv y
L n
Le
d g
eb
ro o
k
L n
D
ri
v e
w a
y
C l
u te D
r
E R i
v er
D r
R
iv e
r
R
d
B e
ar
to
w n
R
d
.
Warren County Bicycle Plan
Map B – Lake Luzerne Inset
No Scale
Legend
Streets_ALIS selection
kPublic Schools
ñGovernment Office
Proposed Off-Road Trails
Existing Off-Road Trails
WCS&QBO Priority Routes
Local Priority Routes
A/GFTC Priority Routes (Staff)
Other Roads
Interstate
Major Roads
Local Streets
Waterbodies
NYS Recreation Areas
Parks (Local)Prepared by: A/GFTC

ññ
ñ
ñ
ñ
k
k
k
Queensbury
Lake George
Bolton
Warrensburg Lake
Luzerne
§
¨
¦87
§
¨
¦87
R i
d
ge
R d
US
Hwy 9
State Ro
ut e
9L
La ke Shore Dr
State
Route 9N
State Route 9
S tate
R
o
u
te 149
Canada S tL
ak
esh o
re
D r
Ba
y
R d
Be
ac
h
R
d
Ba y
R
d
M id
dl
e R
d
Tru
esda
le
H i
ll
R d
Fla t
R oc
k R
d
Cl
e ve
rd
al
e R
d
G
og
gi
n s
R d
Pi
c k
l
e
H i
l l
R d
B
lo
o d
y
Po
nd
R
d
Dump
R
d
Sh
a
w R
d
Big
H
ollo w
B r
Ru
ssell Hi ll
Rd
F o
x
R
d
Lake P
kw yA
ss
em b
ly
P oi
n t
R d
Pi
lo
t K
no
b
R dS
eely
e
R d
S
un
s
e t

T
rlBi
r
c h

A
ve
C l
e m
en
ts
R d
M u
d
P
o
nd
Rd
R o
ck
h u
rs t
R d
F
r
o
n t

S t
D
ri
v e
w ay
S
hop
R d
T
ra vi
s
T
rl
B a
rt
hel
L n
V i
t o
R d
Car
r
L n
La k
e Rd
A l
e x
y
R d
Ru
ss
e l
l H i
ll
R
d
O tt
a w
aD
ies
k
au
G ag
e
.
Warren County Bicycle Plan
Map C – Lake George/Nor th Queensbury Inset
No Scale
Legend
kPublic Schools
ñGovernment Office
Waterb odies
Proposed Off-Road Trails
Existing Off-Road Trails
WCS&QBO Priority Routes
Local Priority Routes
A/GFTC Staff Priority Routes Other Roads
Interstate
Major Roads
Local Streets
Prepared by: A/GFTC
Proposed off-road
connection to
Recreation Center
Proposed off-road
connection between
Bikeway & Route 9
k
k
C
A
N A
D A
O TT
A W
A
D
IES
KA U
WE
S T
B R O
O
KSEW EL
L
GAG
E
BIR
CH
P
R O
SP
E C
T
M T
N
M
OU
NTA
IN
L A
K E
S H
O R
E
D R
BE
A CH
R D
§
¨
¦87
Inset Area

ñññ
ñ
ñ
k
k
k
Bolton
Warrensburg
Lake George
§
¨ ¦87
§
¨ ¦87
State
Route 9
US Hwy 9
Main St
State Route 28
S
tate Rout e
418
River St
State Route 28
River Rd
Schroon River Rd
Pucker St
Mud St
E Schroon River Rd
Alden Ave
Glen Athol Rd
Atateka Dr
High St
Wall StGolf Course Rd
Friends Lake Rd
Dippikill Rd
Valley Rd
Viele Pond Rd
Bowen Hill R d
Athol Rd
Old Route 9
Harrington H ill Rd
Stock Farm Rd
Stony Creek Rd
Ramp
Fox Ln
Rock Ave
Tripp Lake Rd
Charles Olds Rd
Library Ave
Cameron Rd
Potter Brook R d
Frost St
Lamb Hill Rd
Big Hollow Br
Buyce C ross Rd
Cross Rd
Sweet Rd
Forest Lake Rd
Dump Rd
Hendricks Rd
Combs Rd
Oak St
Darrowsville Rd
River St
Jenni Jill Dr
Adirondack Park Preserve
Rollies Rd
Penman Dr
Warren St
Kathy Xing
Pinto Ln
River Ln
Ledgebrook Ln
Driveway
Ramp
Ramp
Ramp
Ramp
.
Warren County Bicycle Plan
Map D – Warrensburg
No Scale
Legend
kPublic Schools
ñGovernment Office
Waterbodies
Parks (Local)
Proposed Off-Road Trails
WCS&QBO Priority Routes
Local Priority Routes
A/GFTC Staff Priority Routes
Interstate
Major Roads
Local Streets
Prepared by: A/GFTC

ñ
ñ
ThurmanStony Creek Wa r re n s b u r g
Ha
rri
s b
u
rg

R d
M
ud S
t
H ig
h
S t
H
ad l
e y
R d
W
arr
e n s
b
u rg

R d
La
n
fe
a r
R d
S
t
a te s

R d
Le
n s L
ake

R dW
ol
f
P on
d
R d
D
ar
tm
ou
th
R d
Fo
dd
er R
d
Riv e
r
R
d
W ai
t e
R
d
Br
a n
n on
R
d
Z
al
t z
R
d
Mu r
ra
y
R d
Bu
tt e r
m
il
k R d
T
h
o m
a
s
R d
W
T uc ke
r
R
d
Be
a r

P o
nd
R d
D
re
xel
R
d
Van
au
ken
R d
Sta te s
R d E
R i
l e
y H ill
R d
Da
r
li n
g
R d
W al
s h

R d
S
n
o w
R d
L
e
d ge
b ro
ok
L
n
.
Warren County Bicycle Plan
Map E – Stony Creek
No Scale
Legendñ
Government OfficeWaterbodiesParks (Local)NYS Recreation AreasProposed Off-Road TrailsExisting Off-Road Trails
WCS&QBO Priority RoutesLocal Priority RoutesA/GFTC Priority Routes (Staff)
Other RoadsInterstateMajor RoadsLocal Streets
Prepared by: A/GFTC

ñ
ñ
k
Bolton Hague
Horicon
Warrensburg
Lake George
§
¨
¦87
§
¨
¦87
Lake S
hore
D
r
Lakeshore Dr
US Hwy 9
S
tat
e Route 8
Lake Shore
D r
S
c
h r
o
o n
R i
v er

R d
E
S ch
ro
o
n
R iv
e
r
R d
W
a
l
l
S t
P
a
d
an
a
r
u m
R
d
C ount y
H w
y
1 1
C
ooli
d
g
e
H i
l
l R d
F
ed e
r
a l
H
il
l R
d
D ia
m on
d
Po
in
t
R d
Valle y W oo
d
s R d
E
dg
ec
o m
b Po
nd R
d
H
ay
e s
b ur
g
R d
Po
tt
e r
H i
ll
R d
P
uc
k
er S
t
Tro
u t L
a
ke
R d
Bu
rn
t
H
il
l R
d
N
Bo
lt o n
Rd
H
en d
ri
c k
s
R d
L
am b
H
il
l
R d
Ne
w
V
e
rm
ont

R d
S
T r
o u
t
L a
k
e
R d
Al
d er
B ro
ok
R d
Tr
out
F all
s R d
H
ori
c
o n A
ve
R a
m p
Fi
n kl
e R
d
H a
rr is

R d
S
awm i
ll
R d
O a
k
Pl
H o
m er

P o
in
t
R d
Bro
ok
S t
D
uel
l
H
ill
R d
T
i
m lo
D
r
Pa
tr ic
k
L n
3
O
aks
D
r
Pi
n
to
L n
B r
a l
e y

P t
P
il o
t

K no
b R
d
All
e n R
d
S
er
v i
c e

R oa
d
R
ose
L
n
E v
a L
n
Ra m
p
.
Warren County Bicycle Plan
Map F – Bolton Inset
No Scale
Legend
kPublic Schools
ñGovernment Office
Waterbodies
Parks (Local)
NYS Recreation Areas
Proposed Off-Road Trails
Existing Off-Road Trails
WCS&QBO Priority Routes
Local Priority Routes
A/GFTC Priority Routes (Staff)
Other Roads
Interstate
Major Roads
Local Streets
Prepared by: A/GFTC

Æ b
ñ ñ
Johnsburg
Thurman
Stony Creek
Wa r re n s b u r g
State Hwy
8
S
ta
te
R
o
ute 41 8
S
t
ate Route 28
r is
b u
rg
R
d
Riv
e r
R
d
M
ud

S t
G l
e n
A
th
o l

R d
G
ar
n e
t
L
ak
e
R d
S
J
o
h ns
b u
r
g R
d
Hi
g h
S tV
al
le y
R
d
Dip
p
ik
i
l l
R
d
Ba
rt
m an
R
W a
rr e
n s
b ur
g
R d
A
ld en
A
ve
L a
n fe a
r
R
d
M ounta
in
R
d
Be
a
r
P on
d R d
G
o
lf
C o
u rs e
R d
S
ta t
e
s
R d
W
ol
f
P
on
d R
d
Dar
tm o
u t
h
R d
B
ow
en
H
il l
R
d
Ath ol
R
d
O l
d Ro
ut
e
9
S
ki
H i
R
d
S
to n
y
C
re e
k
R d
Arm
s
tr o
ng
R
d
Br a
n n
on
Rd
Z a
lt
z R
d
M
ur
r a
y R
d
Po
tt
e r
b ro
ok
R
d
W
Tu c
ker
R
d
Dr e
xel
R
d
Cha
rl
e s

O l
d s
R
d
Ca
m ero n
R
d
V
an a
u k
e n
R
d
Fro
st
S
t
Sta te s R d
E
B u
yc
e C
ro
s
s R
d
Buc
kle
y
R d
C
ro s
s
R d
P
ai
n
t B
e
d
R d
H
en
ry
W e
sc
o tt
Rd
C o
mb s

R d
D
ar
li
n g
R d
W
als
h R d
C
ro
sb
y
R d
B
ar
to
n R
d
Sn ow
geb r
o
ok
L n
.
Warren County Bicycle Plan
Map G – Thurman
No Scale
Legend
NYS Recreation AreasParks (Local)Waterbodies
ñ
Government Office
Æ b
Rail Station
Proposed Off-Road TrailsExisting Off-Road TrailsWCS&QBO Priority RoutesLocal Priority RoutesA/GFTC Priority Routes (Staff)
Other RoadsInterstateMajor RoadsLocal Streets
Prepared by: A/GFTC

ñ
Hague
Lakeshore Dr
G
ra
p
hi
t e
M
ou
nta
in

R d
Lake Shore Dr
State
R
oute 8
W ar
d s
b o r
o
R d
W e
st
H a
g u
e
R d
N e
w
H
ag
u e
R
d
B attl
e H
il
l
R
d
P
ad a
n a
ru m
R
d
Si
l v
e r
B
ay
R
d
D o
dd
H
il
l R d
S
um
m
it
D r
C a
m p
R
d
B
att
le
H
il l

S
pu r
C
om
st
o c
k R
d
O l
d Mi
ll
R d
T
e
rr
a
ce
R d
D r
iv e
w a
y
W
H oll
o w
R
d
Fr
o g
L n
N
ew
H ag u
e R
d
.
Warren County Bicycle Plan
Map H – Hague Inset
No Scale
Legend
kPublic Schools
ñGovernment Office
Waterbodies
Parks (Local)
NYS Recreation Areas
Proposed Off-Road Trails
Existing Off-Road Trails
WCS&QBO Priority Routes
Local Priority Routes
A/GFTC Priority Routes (Staff)
Other Roads
Interstate
Major Roads
Local Streets
Prepared by: A/GFTC

ññk
Horicon
§
¨
¦87
State Rou
t
e
8
Sta
te
Route 9
US H
wy 9
State Route
9
S tate
Route 8
E
S ho
re
D r
Pa
li
s a
d es
R d
V
a
l
e
n ti
n e
R d
P
ad a
n
ar
u m
R d
S
ch
ro
o
n
R i
v e
r R
d
B
ean
R d
C
am p
R
d
Do
rs et
R
d
B ea
ve
r
P o
nd
R
d
Sha
w H i
ll R d
Ro
ck
A
v
e
L an
do
n H
ill R
d
Hayesb u
r
g R
d
Pe
as
e
H
il
l R
d
Jo
hn
so
n
R d
G
ra
s s
vil
le
R
d
Bu
rn
t H
ill
R d
P
uck
er
S t
H
ori
c
o n
A
v
e
P h
ar
o h
R d
He
n
dri
c ks
R d
St
a rb
uck
H
il
l
R d
A l
d e
r B
ro
ok
R d
P
in e
S t
R am
p
Tr ou
t F alls
R d
Ca
r
l T u
rn
er
R
d
Du
e
l
l H
il
l R
d
Davi
s
R
d
Ne
w V
e
rm o
n
t
R d
S

I k e H
ayes
R d
L
i
ly
P
on
d
R
d
B l
a
ir
R
d
H a
rr is

R d
O l
d
S c
h
ro
on
R d
H
em
i
n gw
ay
R d
P
in
e L
n
S h
ort
S
t
In g
r
a h
am R
d
M ay
R d
R
ed
W i
n g
R d
B
en t
L
ee R
d
New
S
t
M a
ri
e
L n
P
in to
L n
C
am
p
R
d
Ram
p
.
Warren County Bicycle Plan
Map I – Horicon Inset
No Scale
Legend
kPublic Schools
ñGovernment Office
Waterbodies
Parks (Local)
NYS Recreation Areas
Proposed Off-Road Trails
Existing Off-Road Trails
WCS&QBO Priority Routes
Local Priority Routes
A/GFTC Priority Routes (Staff)
Other Roads
Interstate
Major Roads
Local Streets
Prepared by: A/GFTC

ññ
ñk
k
Chester
§
¨
¦87
§
¨
¦87
S
ta t
e
R
oute
2
8
State Ro u
te
9
US Hwy 9
State Ro
ute 8
Olmstedville RdSta
te Hwy
28N
Sta t
e Hwy
8
S tate
R
o
u
te
8
State Rou
te 9
State Route 28
State Rou
te 8
P
uck
e r
St
R
ive r
R
d
Ig e
rn
a R
d
E S
hor
e
D
r
Fri
e
n ds
L
a
ke
R d
V
al
e
n t
in
e R d
A
ta
te
ka
D
r
S
J o h
nsb
urg
R d
L
a
n d
on

H i
ll R
d
Sch
ro on

R iv e r
R d
B
e
a n
R
d
Hu
d so
n
S t
W
a
d d
el
l
R d
M
a
in
S t
S
haw
H
il
l
R d
R
ock
A ve
G
le
n A
th
ol
R
d
B yr
n e
s
R d
H
arr in
g to
n
R d
S
to
ck
F
ar
m
R d
J
o
h
n so
n
R
d
D ip
pik
ill
R d
Va
n
d
er
w
alk
er
R
d
O ld
R o
ut
e
9
L a
n e
R
d
Pa
r
k
R d
Bu r
n t
Hi
ll
Rd
P err
y
R
d
F
ox

L n
F
e
rr
i
s s

R d
H
a
rd s
c
ra
b b
le
R d
St
a rb
u
ck
H i
l
l R
d
Hea
th
R d
V
al
e n t
in
e P
ond
R
d
Ra
m p
G
ra
n d
vi
e w
Rd
D ur
k in
R d
P
o
tte
r B
ro
ok
R
d
D
av
is

R d
C
am
p
g r
o un
d
R d
T
h e
ri
o t
A
ve
W
e
st
R d
Va
car

R d
O
w
en
s
R d
D
r
iv
ew a
y
O
ld
S
ch r
o o n
R d
Pr
io
ry
D r
Pi
n
e L
n
Ver
n
T
e n
n yso n
R d
Sh
o r
t
S
t
Ta
n n
e
ry
R
d
M
ah o
ne
y D
r
Holl a
n d
R d
J
o
ne
s R
d
A
ust
in

P o
nd
R d
R
ed
W
in
g
R d
P
ort
e r
R d
M a
r
ie
L
n
E m i
ly
L n
E
S h
or
e
D
r
R am p
Ri
v er
R
d
.
Warren County Bicycle Plan
Map J – Chester Inset
No Scale
Legend
kPublic Schools
ñGovernment Office
Waterbodies
Parks (Local)
NYS Recreation Areas
Proposed Off-Road Trails
Existing Off-Road Trails
WCS&QBO Priority Routes
Local Priority Routes
A/GFTC Priority Routes (Staff)
Other Roads
Interstate
Major Roads
Local Streets
Prepared by: A/GFTC

ñ
k
Johnsburg
State Hwy
8
Stat e Rou te 28
State Hwy 28N
P
eac
eful Va
lley R
d
G a
r
n et
L
ak
e R
d
Riv
er

R d
Ba
rtm a
n
R d
Go
od
m a
n R d
H
u
d so
n
S t
1
3 th
L
ake

R d
M
ai
n S t
H
a
rv
ey
R d
O
ld

R i
v er
R d
S

J
o h ns
b u
r
g R d
C
ou
lt
e r

R d
S
ki H i
R
d
Ch at
ie
m ac
Rd
O l
d F
ar
m R
d
B y
rn e
s R
d
Ar
m s
t
r o
n g

R d
P
ark
R d
Ov en

M o
un ta i
n
R dB
a
ck
T
o S o
d om
R dE
dw
ar
ds

H ill
R d
R
oger
s
Rd
D u
rkin
Rd
Owe
n s
R
d
C ro
ss R
d
4
-H

R d
B
ar
n e
y H
il
l R d
Ho
l
la
n d R
d
A
usti
n P
o
nd
R d
S
he
ild s
R d
O s
h er
R d
.
Warren County Bicycle Plan
Map K – Johnsburg Inset
No Scale
Legend
kPublic Schools
ñGovernment Office
Waterbodies
Parks (Local)
NYS Recreation Areas
Proposed Off-Road Trails
Existing Off-Road Trails
WCS&QBO Priority Routes
Local Priority Routes
A/GFTC Priority Routes (Staff)
Other Roads
Interstate
Major Roads
Local Streets
Prepared by: A/GFTC

To w n  of  Queensbury, Warren  County, NY
March,  2012
2 Winners  Circle
Albany,  New  York   12205
Creighton  Manning
Engineering,  LLP
Phone:  518 ‐446‐ 0396
Fax: 518‐ 446‐0397
www.cmellp.com
E ‐mail:  msargent@cmellp.com
Quaker Road  to  Queensbury  Avenue
Connector  Road  Study

Adirondack/Glens  Falls
Transportation  Council
11  South  Street,  Suite  203
Glens  Falls,  NY  12801
518.223 ‐0086

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page ii
Acknowledgements
Study Advisory Committee

Stuart Baker, Town of Queensbury
Nelson Chase Jr., Warren/Washington County Emergency Training Center
Robert Cherry, New York State Department of Transportation
Ed Doughney, Warren County Department of Public Works
Aaron Frankenfeld, Adirondack/Glens Falls Transportation Committee
Wayne LaMothe, Warren County
Kate Mance, Adirondack/Glens Falls Transportation Committee
Charles Mellon, Warren/Washington County Emergency Training Center
Ray Rathburn, Warren/Washington County Emergency Training Center Tori Riley, Washington County
John Strough, Town of Queensbury
Mike Valentine, Adirondack/Glens Falls Transportation Committee
John Wheatly, Warren County Econom ic Development Corporation

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page iii
Table of Contents
Page
Title Page ………………………………………………………………
……………………………………… .i
Acknowledgements ………………………………………………………………
………………………… ii
Table of Contents………………………………………………………………
………………………….. iii
List of Figures ………………………………………………………………
………………………………. iv
List of Tables ………………………………………………………………
……………………………….. iv
List of Appendices………………………………………………………………
………………………….. v
Executive Summary ………………………………………………………………
……………………….. vi

I.
Introduction ………………………………………………………………
……………………………… 1
A) Study Background, Overview, and Purpose ………………………………………………… 1
B) Study Area ………………………………………………………………
…………………………… 2
C) Study Objectives ………………………………………………………………
…………………… 2
D) Approach ………………………………………………………………
…………………………….. 3
II. Existing Conditions ………………………………………………………………
……………………. 5
A) General Environment ………………………………………………………………
…………….. 5
1. Zoning and Existing Land Use …………………………………………………………….. 5
2. Hazardous Waste and Contaminated Materials ………………………………………. 6
3. Wetlands Screening ………………………………………………………………
………….. 8
4. Ecology and Endangered/Threatened Species ……………………………………….. 9
5. Farmland/Agricultural Property…………………………………………………………. 10
6. Floodplains, Surface Waters and Cr itical Environmental Areas ………………… 10
7. Historic/Archeological Resources………………………………………………………. 10
B) Transportation ………………………………………………………………
……………………. 10
1. Study Area Roadways ………………………………………………………………
………. 10
2. Study Intersections ………………………………………………………………
…………. 11
3. Existing Traffic Characteristics………………………………………………………….. 13
4. Traffic Operations………………………………………………………………
…………… 13
5. Existing Travel Times……………………………………………………………..
……….. 15
6. Bike and Pedestrian Accommodations ………………………………………………… 15
7. Crash History………………………………………………………………
…………………. 16
8. Existing Transit Service ………………………………………………………………
……. 17
C) Public Meeting and Workshop #1 …………………………………………………………… 17
III. Future Conditions ………………………………………………………………
……………………. 20
IV. Alternatives Evaluation ………………………………………………………………
……………… 23
A) Future Conditions ………………………………………………………………
……………….. 23
B) Description of Alternatives………………………………………………………………
……. 24
1. Alternative 1: Upgrade Improvements by Others …………………………………. 25
2. Alternative 2: Construction on Northern Alignment……………………………… 25
3. Alternative 3A: Construction on Central Alignment ……………………………… 25
4. Alternative 3B: Construction on Central Alignment with Relocated Stone
Quarry Road ………………………………………………………………
………………….. 26

5. Alternative 4A: Construction on Southern Alignment …………………………… 26

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page iv
6. Alternative 4B: Construction on Southern Alignment with Relocated Stone
Quarry Road ………………………………………………………………
………………….. 27

C) Alternatives Evaluation………………………………………………………………
…………. 27
1. Environmental Impacts ………………………………………………………………
……. 27
2. Levels of Service ………………………………………………………………
…………….. 29
3. Travel Time Comparisons ………………………………………………………………
… 31
4. Overall Evaluation ………………………………………………………………
…………… 32
V. Conclusions, Recommendations, and Implementation ……………………………………. 36
A) Conclusions ………………………………………………………………
……………………….. 36
B) Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Transit Accommodations …………………………………….. 37
C) Public Meeting and Workshop #2 …………………………………………………………… 37
D) Study Recommendations ………………………………………………………………
………. 38
1. Short-term Recommendations …………………………………………………………… 38
2. Long-term Recommendations …………………………………………………………… 39

List of Figures
Page
Figure I.1 – Study Area ………………………………………………………………
……………………. 4

Figure 2.1 – 2011 AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ………………………………………………. 18
Figure 2.2 – 2011 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ………………………………………………. 19
Figure 3.1 – 2015 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ………………………………………………. 21
Figure 3.2 – 2035 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ………………………………………………. 22
Figure 4.1 – Roadway Alignment Alternatives ……………………………………………………. 34
Figure 4.2 – Alternative 4A Concept Plan ………………………………………………………….. 35

List of Tables

Table II.1 – Traffic Volume Summary ………………………………………………………………
.. 13
Table II.2 – 2011 Level of Service Ranges …………………………………………………………. 14
Table II.3 – 2011 Existing Levels of Service……………………………………………………….. 14
Table II.4 – Crash History from Janu ary 1, 2008 through January 31, 2011 …………….. 16
Table IV.1 – 2035 PM Peak Hour Levels of Service………………………………………………. 30
Table IV.2 – Alternatives Comparison Summary …………………………………………………. 32

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page v
List of Appendices

Appendix A …………………………………………………………… Environmental Documentation
Appendix B ………………………………………………………………
Public Workshop Summaries

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page vi
Executive Summary
The Adirondack/Glens Falls Transportation Council (A/GFTC) initiated this Queensbury
Connector Road Study to study the feasibility, costs, and benefits of a proposed
connector road between Quaker Road and Queensbury Avenue. Access to several
existing facilities including the Floyd Bennett Memorial Airport, Queensbury Business
Park, and Airport Industrial Park, is constraine d by a lack of direct routing to and from
these facilities on the existing two-lane roadway network. In addition, several
development projects are under consideration in the area, including an Emergency
Services Training Center for Warren and Washington Counties on the west side of
Queensbury Avenue, a runway expansion at the airport, and the Quaker Ridge
Technology Park (QRTP) proposed on lands north of Walmart at an extension of Quaker
Ridge Boulevard. There is also potential for the traveling public to benefit from a
roadway connection between Quaker Road and Queensbury Avenue to improve access
and mobility. A/GFTC sponsored this study to evaluate the public investment in this
potential expansion of the transportation system with respect to the overall public
benefit that could be gained when evalua ted against the social, environmental, and
economic impacts associated with the project.

The study area is located within the southeastern portion of the Town of Queensbury
in Warren County. The overall study area is bounded by Hicks Road to the north, Dix
Avenue (NY Route 32) to the south, Quaker Road (NY Route 254) to the southwest,
Queensbury Avenue to the east, and Ridge Road (NY Route 9L) to the west.

To provide a baseline condition to measure the potential benefit of the connector
roadway, existing, short-term (2015), and long-term (2035) traffic conditions were
analyzed. The evaluation of existing conditions identified deficiencies in the
transportation network independent of the future needs caused by growth in the area.
Evaluation and field observations of the existing transportation network (including the
new Walmart) show that the study area intersections generally operate at acceptable
levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours with one exception: the southbound
Quaker Road approach to Dix Avenue, which backs up through the Quaker Ridge Road
intersection during the PM peak hour. Modifying the signal phasing at the Quaker
Road/Dix Avenue intersection is recommended to improve existing traffic operations
so that vehicle queues no longer interfere with operations at the Quaker Road/Quaker
Ridge Boulevard intersection.

The crash rate on Dix Avenue between Quaker Road and Queensbury Avenue, which
includes the Highland Avenue intersection, is above the statewide average. The
NYSDOT is aware of the condition and recently designed pavement marking
channelization improvements which will be implemented and may be beneficial.

The short term forecasts (2015) assume d general background traffic growth,
development of the Emergency Services Training Center, and Phase 1 of the QRTP. The
long range forecasts (2035) a dd Phase 2 of QRTP, partial build-out of the Queensbury
Business Park, and substantial build-out of the Airport Industrial Park. The resulting
overall traffic growth equates to approximately 8% at 2015 and 35% at 2035.

Evaluation of the 2015 conditions shows that signal phasing and timing changes are
sufficient to address existing operational deficiencies and to provide good operations.

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page vii
Assuming only Phase 1 of the QRTP is completed, the 2035 traffic volumes can also be
accommodated with this same system optimization.

If Phase 2 (full-build) of the QRTP is completed, the evaluation of the 2035 conditions
shows that traffic operations will break down and considerable transportation
improvements would be needed (consistent with the traffic study for the QRTP). These
improvements include:

 widening Quaker Road to include two full through lanes in each direction from
approximately 500 feet north of Quaker Ridge Boulevard to approximately 500
feet south of Dix Avenue
 constructing a second eastbound left-turn lane on Quaker Road at Quaker Ridge
Boulevard
 constructing a second southbound left-turn lane on Quaker Ridge Boulevard at
Quaker Road
 constructing a second southbound left-turn lane on Quaker Road at Dix Avenue
 widening Dix Avenue to include two lanes eastbound leaving the Quaker Road
intersection to receive the dual lane southbound left-turn movement and taper
back to one lane after approximately 500 feet
 constructing a 150 foot eastbound left-tur n lane on Dix Avenue at Queensbury
Avenue
 modifying the traffic signal at the Quaker Road intersections with Quaker Ridge
Boulevard and Dix Avenue as necessary to accommodate the roadway widening
 implementing signal timing adjustments throughout the study area to maximize
operations

A sensitivity analysis indicated that regardless of the timing of QRTP Phase 2, and
regardless of whether a connector road is built, the transportation improvements
proposed by the QRTP traffic study would be necessary; therefore, these improvements
are considered project related mitigation and are referred to in this document as
“Improvements by Others”. In addition to these improvements, this study also
recommends a westbound left turn lane on Dix Avenue at Queensbury Avenue
opposite the eastbound left turn lane identified in the QRTP study.

Although this study indicates that the connector road would improve access to
adjacent land uses (Emergency Services Training Center, Quaker Ridge Technology
Park, and Queensbury Business Park) and provide a small overall mobility benefit, the
connector road would not ameliorate the need for improvements to the existing
system. In addition, the estimated cost to construct a connector roadway as a public
project ranges from $6.1 to $10.4 million, wh ile the potential travel time savings is
small (on the order of 15 to 90 seconds depending on the location). Based on the
estimated costs and minor public benefits (in terms of regional transportation access
and mobility), there does not appear to be sufficient justification to warrant public
construction of the connector road.

During December 2011, the Warren County Department of Public Works Committee
agreed to pursue a Letter of Intent with the QRTP developer that would in essence
allow the developer to construct an access road along County property to his parcel in
exchange for an aviation easement along the private property, while enabling the

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page viii
County to expand the southern runway at the airport. Design, construction, and
funding of a connector road have not yet begun and this study is in a position to
inform those processes.

While public transportation benefits do not necessitate the construction of a new
connector roadway, Warren County and the Town of Queensbury may decide that the
economic benefits associated with the runway expansion and access to the
Queensbury Business Park, Quaker Ridge Technology Park, Emergency Services
Training Center, and Airport Industrial Park warrant some level of public funding for
the connector road. Future ownership of the connector roadway was not determined
as part of this study, however, it is recommended that if this connector roadway is
built as part of a private development, it should meet the design criteria identified in
this report including wide shoulders to accommodate bicycles and pedestrians.

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 1
I. Introduction
A) Study Background, Overview, and Purpose
The Adirondack/Glens Falls Transporta tion Council (A/GFTC) initiated this Queensbury
Connector Road Study to evaluate the potential feasibility, benefits and costs of a
proposed new roadway that would connect Quaker Road and Queensbury Avenue in
the Town of Queensbury. The study seeks to identify existing deficiencies with the
surface transportation system that serves the immediate area, quantify the impacts to
the system that result from future growth and development, and analyze various
conceptual layouts of the proposed connector road. The study provides and
documents:

 an analysis of existing conditions of major components of the surface
transportation system, including both operational and safety related measures
 the immediate and longer term benefits and impacts of establishing a roadway
connection between Quaker Road and Queensbury Avenue
 a conceptual layout and cross-section of the proposed roadway based upon
standard design criteria, known constrains, and comparative benefits and costs
 construction cost estimates for various transportation alternatives

A new connector road between
Quaker Road and Queensbury
Avenue would potentially improve
access to the existing Floyd Bennett
Memorial Airport, the Airport
Industrial Park, and Queensbury
Business Park while also facilitating
direct access to planned
developments such as the
Emergency Services Training Center,
the Quaker Ridge Technology Park
and the recently completed Walmart.

This study evaluates the necessity,
feasibility, and viability of a
connector road between Quaker
Road and Queensbury Avenue in the
context of the regional
transportation system. In general,
any publicly funded expansion of the
transportation system should
provide an overall benefit when
evaluated against environmental
impacts and the capital and
maintenance costs associated with a
new roadway.

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 2
B) Study Area
The study area is located within
the southeastern portion of the
Town of Queensbury in Warren
County. The overall study area is
bounded by Hicks Road to the
north, Dix Avenue (NY Route 32) to
the south, Quaker Road (NY Route
254) to the southwest, Queensbury
Avenue to the east, and Ridge
Road (NY Route 9L) to the west as
shown in the adjacent image. The
study boundaries include the
following intersections:
 Quaker Road/Ridge Road
 Quaker Road/Quaker Ridge
Boulevard
 Quaker Road/Dix Avenue
 Lower Dix Avenue/Highland
Avenue
 Queensbury Avenue/Dix
Avenue
 Queensbury Avenue/Stone
Quarry Road
 Queensbury Avenue/Airport
Driveway
 Queensbury Avenue/Hicks
Road/Casey Road
 Ridge Road/Hicks Road

In addition to the overall study area, a more narrowly focused area was identified for
preliminary environmental screenings wh ere new roadway alignments could be
considered. This environmental screening area is located south of the airport, as
shown on Figure 1.1, and also includes the study intersections located north and west
of the airport.

C) Study Objectives
The Study Advisory Committee defined several objectives for this planning study. They
are:

 Evaluate the study area transportation network to determine feasible
improvement alternatives that optimize land use access, traffic operations,
safety, and multimodal accommodations for existing, planned and potential
land use development over the next 20-30 years.
 Evaluate potential si gnificant environmental impacts of feasible alternatives and
the means to avoid or mitigate them.
 Determine current cost estimates for feasible improvement alternatives given
the probable development parameters and budget and implementation phasing.

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 3
D) Approach
To accomplish the study objectives, the study involved several major tasks including:

 inventory existing conditions and environmental constraints
 development of future transportation and land use conditions based upon
planned and approved projects surrounding the study area
 evaluation of several transportation improvement conceptual alternatives,
including upgrading the existing system and construction of a connector
roadway
 comparison of the conceptual alternatives through the development of an
evaluation matrix
 public involvement through agency coordination and public meetings

The alternatives are evaluated in accordance with A/GFTC’s Twelve Principles, adopted
by the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) to guide future transportation
planning and programming activities. In general, these principles acknowledge the
importance of coordinating land use and transportation planning, maintenance and
maximum utilization of the existing transp ortation system, accommodating all modes
of travel for viable transportation options, and providing and operating a safe
transportation system for all users.

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 5
II. Existing Conditions
A) General Environment
1. Zoning and Existing Land Use

A mix of zoning types exist within the study area as shown in the below (left). The
area is zoned with the following:
 Commercial Light Industrial (CLI, purple)
 Land Conservation 10 Acre (LC-10A, green)
 Commercial Intensive and Commercial Moderate (CI and CM, red)
 Neighborhood Residential (NR, orange)
 Moderate Density Residential (MDR, beige)

Along Quaker Road, the properties are zoned as Commercial Intensive. Commercial
Moderate zoning extends along Dix Avenue toward the Washington County line. The
airport and surrounding area are primarily zoned Commercial Light Industrial. South
and west of the airport, the land is zoned for land conservation. Residential uses are
designated on the east side of Queensbury Avenue south of the airport and along
Ridge Road and Hicks Road.

The above right image illustrates the existing land uses and the large amount of vacant
land available in the study area. The image generally shows good correlation between
existing land use and existing zoning with a few exceptions at the parcel level. Vacant
developable land includes commercial opportunities along Quaker Road and Dix
Existing Zoning Existing Land Use

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 6
Avenue and industrial development along Queensbury Avenue, including build-out of
the Airport Industrial Park and Queensbury Business Park. As these areas are
developed, driveway spacing and location wi ll be important considerations to preserve
corridor operations and mobility.

One notable land use in the study area is the Floyd Bennett Memorial Airport. While
daily operations at the airport produce relati vely little vehicular traffic, the annual
Balloon Festival brings a large amount of traffic to the airport and can cause traffic
congestion during peak arrival and departure time periods. Providing additional access
to event parking and coordinating parking in multiple areas at once could relieve some
of the congestion associated with the festival. The South Queensbury Fire Station is
also located in the study area. Alternative route options and increased access to
nearby parcels has the potential to benefit emergency response service, primarily to
the directly accessed parcels.

2. Hazardous Waste and Contaminated Materials
A search of federal and state environmental databases was conducted by
Environmental Data Resources Inc (EDR). The results of the search were provided in an
EDR Radius Map Report da ted September 7, 2011 (Appen dix A). The EDR Report
incorporated listed facilities, with environmental records, on several environmental
databases in and surrounding the project corridor. The EDR Report included a review
of the available federal and state environm ental databases and was compiled in general
accordance with American Standard Test Method (ASTM) standards for a government
records review. The EDR Report included (but was not limited to) a review of the
following databases:

Federal Databases
 National Priorities List (NPL), Proposed NPL, and Delisted NPL
 Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Information System (CERCLA Active and Archive)
 Resource Conservation an d Recovery Act Information System – Treatment,
Storage, and Disposal Facilities (RCRATSD)
 RCRA Generator – Small and Large Quantity Generators
 RCRA Information System – Correc tive Action Sites (CORRACTS)
 Emergency Response Notification System (ERNS)
 Land Use Control Information System (LUCIS)
 PCB Activity Database System (PADS)
 Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System (TRIS)
 Section Seven Tracking System (SSTS)
 Civil Enforcement Docket (DOCKET)
 Toxic Substance Control Act Inventory (TSCA)

New York State Databases
 New York State Inactive Hazardous Waste Disposal Site Registry (HSWDS)
 New York State Solid Waste Facilities List (SWF)
 New York State Leaking Storage Tank Data (LTANKS)
 New York State Major Oil Storage Facilities List (MOSF)
 New York State Chemical Bulk Storage Tanks List (CBS)
 New York State Petroleum Bulk Storage Tank List (PBS)

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 7
 New York Spills List (SPILLS)

Tribal Records and EDR proprietary databases were also queried. A review of specific
case files maintained by the NYSDEC wa s not included in this scope of work.

Government Records Review Results

The environmental database review identified 39 listed incidents with known
addresses/locations within the standard approximate minimum search distance (AMSD)
of the project corridor. Multiple incidents oc curred at some facilities. Many additional
sites in the area did not have numbered street addresses or were not plotted on the
EDR Map. Instead, these sites were listed as Orphan Sites. Database information for
the Orphan Sites was reviewed on EDR’s website. Pertinent sites listed within the
AMSD or Orphan Sites that reference features/locations along the project corridor are
discussed below.

National Priorities List (NPL) Sites or State Hazardous Waste Sites (SHWS) were not listed
in the EDR Report as being present within or adjoining to the project study area.
Several petroleum releases have occurred along Quaker Road and Dix Avenue. The
majority of these releases are located west of Quaker Road and south of Dix Avenue.

Soils containing petroleum compounds exceeding cleanup objectives appear to remain
at 108 Lower Dix Avenue (located at th e northwest corner of the Dix Avenue/
Queensbury Avenue intersection). Past releases at 756 Quaker Road (Hess Station) and
777 Quaker Road (Stewarts Shops/Former Ki ng Fuels) may have also impacted soil
and/or groundwater at these locations along the Dix Avenue/Quaker Road intersection.

Field Observations

No visual evidence of contamination was observed in areas that were traversed during
the screening of the connector road corridor. No visible air emissions were observed,
and no odors were detected.

Two features at two different locations we re discovered that may warrant further
investigation regarding the potential to represent a concern for Hazardous Waste/
Contaminated Materials relative to the conne ctor road corridor project. One feature
consists of a capped steel well casing inside of an open-top plywood box. There is a
utility pole within several feet of the well, bu t it did not appear to be in service. The
well is located in a field that is bounded to the north by the unpaved part of East
Sanford Road (on east side of Quaker Road) and to the west by Quaker Road. It is
unknown whether this well is an abandoned private well or a monitoring well. A
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request was submitted to the Town of Queensbury
in an attempt to obtain additional informat ion regarding this well. The second feature
is located next to Stone Quarry Road, behind the substation with frontage along the
east side of Queensbury Avenue. The feature contains pieces of equipment and a
small building and could be a pump station or some type of abatement or treatment
system. A FOIA request was submitted to the Town in an attempt to obtain additional
information regarding this site.

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 8
3. Wetlands Screening
National Wetland Inventory (NWI), New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation (NYSDEC) Freshwater wetlands maps, topographic mapping, the County
Soil Survey, and hydric soils lists have been re viewed to assist with identifying potential
wetland locations. Mapped wetland locations exist within the project study area.

A wetland field screening was
completed November 2
through November 4, 2011.
During that visit, several areas
of wetland were observed and
consisted of palustrine
emergent, scrub-shrub, and
forested wetlands. The
general locations of the
observed wetland areas are
shown in the image to the
right in the orange, red, and
green cross-hatch pattern, and
can be refe renced on Figure
A.1 in Appendix A. The image
shows the existing Walmart
and the proposed Emergency
Services Training Center and
QRTP. The wetland locations
are approximate and for
planning purposes only; a
formal delineation would be
required during the design
phase of a connector road.

Two of the identified wetland
areas are mapped as state-
regulated freshwater wetlands,
which also correspond with mapped NWI areas (reference Figure A.1). New York State
Freshwater Wetland HF-3 (left side of the image), is an extensive wetland complex
occupying an area of over 700- acres. The majority of the wetland area is comprised of
swamp, and consists of cedar and hardwoods. A smaller portion of this wetland, as
described further in the following section, Ecology and Endangered/Threatened
Species , has been classified as a marl fen, but is located between HF-3 proper and the
end of one of the runways at the Floyd Bennett Memorial Airport. The other state-
regulated wetland is HF-8, which is located in the eastern most part of the study area
(right side of the image) and is transected by Queensbury Avenue.

Lastly, there are three to four small wetlands that have developed in topographic
depressions near the utility easement at the end of Quaker Ridge Boulevard. These
areas support emergent wetland habitats. Although small in area and at first
observation not ecologically sign ificant, a great blue heron took to flight out of one the
areas as it was approached by the screener. If any of the alternatives, with the

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 9
potential for wetland impacts, are progressed for further consideration and design, the
wetland boundaries would have to be delineated to determine impacts and identify
permit requirements.

4. Ecology and Endangered/Threatened Species
A review of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) County List of
Threatened/Endangered Species was completed. The Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis) and
karner blue butterfly ( Lycaeides Melissa samuelis ) are listed as occurring in Warren
County (reference the USFWS list in Appendix A). The list indicates that the Indiana bat
is present in Warren County in winter and summer-winter, which suggests that there is
at least one hibernacula located in the County. Bog turtle ( Clemmys muhlenbergii) is
also on the list, but is denoted as an historic account.

Based on a preliminary field review, it appears that the study area contains
summertime Indiana bat habitat. More spec ifically, suitable habitat was observed in
field and wetland forest areas that abut the east side of Quaker Road where it
intersects East Sanford Road. The habitat consists of a predominately forested wetland
with scrub-shrub and emergent plant communities mixed-in, particularly where there is
an existent drainage channel. Included in the wetland forest area are dead or dying
trees with exfoliating bark, which could be used by male and female Indiana bats for
roosting in the summertime. A large-diameter dead tree with exfoliating bark openly
stands in a field adjacent to the forested wetland area; since this tree is large in
diameter, is dead with large pieces of loose bark, and is exposed to the appropriate
solar gain, this tree has the potential to be used by female Indiana bats as a maternity
roost.

Karner blue butterflies inhabit extensive pine barrens, oak savannas or openings in oak
woodlands, and open areas, such as airports and right-of-ways, that support the
growth of lupine ( Lupinus perennis), the only food source consumed by the species
larval stage. The origin of remnant popu lations in Saratoga and Warren Counties are
not certain since there is little evidence for former pine barrens occurring in these
areas. Some recent populations have occupied sandy successional old fields.

In New York State, bog turtles inhabit open-canopy wet meadows, sedge meadows, and
calcareous fens. In the Hudson River Valley , bog turtle habitats may be isolated from
other wetlands or they may exist as part of larger wetland complexes. Bog turtle
habitat is often fed by groundwater and the vegetation always includes various species
of sedges that form hummocks and the soil is mucky.

None of the wetlands identified during the field screening of the project area contained
any features typical of suitable bog turtle habitat (e.g., spring fed water and hummock
forming vegetation); further study regarding the effects of the connector road on the
bog turtle is not necessary.

NYSDEC National Heritage Program (NHP) re sponded in a letter, dated November 18,
2011, regarding state-listed threatened/endangered species, significant natural
communities, and other significant habitats. The Natural Heritage Report on Rare
Species and Ecological Communities contained one record (reference Appendix A). The
record shows the occurrence of a significant ecological community. The community is

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 10
a marl fen located at the Floyd Bennett Memorial Airport marsh, which is in the study
area. The marl fen is contiguous with NYS Freshwater Wetland HF-3 and is adjacent to
the southern end of the north-south runway (Runway 1 end of Runway 1-19). Open
marl flats and marl pools formerly occurred between the runway and HF-3, a rich
swamp comprised of a Cedar swamp and hardwood swamp, prior to being ditched for
agricultural purposes and extensive pumping of the ground water.

5. Farmland/Agricultural Property
A review of the County soil survey has determined that prime/unique soils exist within
the project area (Appendix A, Figure A.5). Although the project study area contains
soils mapped as prime/unique, the area is zo ned as industrial. As such, no further
involvement is necessary with respect to the Farmland Protection Policy Act. The
project area is not within a designated agricultural district; therefore, the provisions of
the Agriculture and Markets Law do not apply.

6. Floodplains, Surface Waters and Critical Environmental Areas
Based on review of Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Maps for
Community Panels 3608790029B and 3608790027B, the project study area is not
within an area designated as a 100 or 500-ye ar flood zone although there is a 500-year
floodplain located to the northwest of the screening area. As such, advancement of
any of the proposed alternatives would not require further study with regard to the
NYS Flood Insurance Compliance Progra m or Executive Order 11988 Floodplain
Management.

No surface water bodies were observed within the project study area.

There are three (3) Critical Environmental Areas listed for Warren County (Round Pond,
Rush Pond, and Glen Lake/Surrounding area). None of these areas fall within the
bounds of the project study area.

7. Historic/Archeological Resources
A review of the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation
(NYSOPRHP) GIS mapping has determined that the entire project study area is mapped
as potentially archeologically sensitive. Spec ifically known is the J. Cross Historic Site
which includes the remains of a 19
th century school house on the southeast quadrant
of the Ridge Road/Hicks Road intersection. According to work completed for Warren
County, this site is likely Historic Register eligible. For any areas where new
disturbance is proposed, the NYSOPRHP may require more detailed investigations. A
project review request will need to be subm itted to SHPO regarding the potential for
historic/cultural impacts.

B) Transportation
1. Study Area Roadways

 Quaker Road – Quaker Road provides northwest/southeast travel through the
study area and is designated County Route 70 (CR 70) and NY Route 254.
Within the study limits Quaker Road has one 12-foot travel lane in each direction
with 8-foot paved shoulders. Accord ing to the 2010 Pavement Data Report
published by the NYSDOT, Quaker Road is an urban principal arterial with good

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 11
pavement condition. Quaker Road is also part of the National Highway System.
The posted speed limit is 40 mph.

 Dix Avenue
– Dix Avenue provides east/west travel through the study area and
is designated CR 42 from the Glens Falls City line to the intersection with
Highland Avenue. From Highland Avenue east, Dix Avenue is designated NY
Route 32 and is part of the National Highway System. Dix Avenue has one 12-
foot travel lane in each direction with 2 to 5 foot paved shoulders. Dix Avenue
is classified as an urban principal arteri al with good pavement condition. The
posted speed limit is 35-mph.

 Queensbury Avenue
– Queensbury Avenue provides north/south travel through
the study area, is classified as an urban minor arterial, and designated CR 52.
Queensbury Avenue has one 12-foot travel lane in each direction with 4 foot
paved shoulders. The posted speed limit is 55-mph.

 Ridge Road
– Ridge Road generally provides north/south travel through the
study area and is designated NY Route 9L. Ridge Road has one 11-foot travel
lane in each direction with 3 to 6 foot paved shoulders. According to the 2010
Pavement Data Report, Quaker Road is an urban minor arterial with fair to good
pavement condition. The posted speed limit is 45 mph.

 Hicks Road
– Hicks Road, classified as an urban minor arterial, provides
east/west travel through the study area and is designated CR 52. Hicks Road
has one 10 to 11-foot travel lane in ea ch direction with 2 to 4-foot paved
shoulders. There is no posted speed limit on Hicks Road. This roadway is
currently being designed for re habilitation/reconstruction.

2. Study Intersections
The traffic control and geometry of the primary study area intersections are as follows:

 Quaker Road/Ridge Road
– This is a four-way in tersection operating under
actuated traffic signal control. This traffic signal is part of a time-based
coordinated system with other traffic signals located to the west on Quaker
Road. The eastbound and westbound Quaker Road approaches each provide a
left-turn lane, a through lane, and a shared through/right-turn lane. The
northbound and southbound Ridge Road approaches each provide a left-turn
lane and a shared through/right-turn lane. There are no pedestrian
accommodations at the intersection.

 Quaker Road/Quaker Ridge Boulevard
– This is a four-way intersection operating
under actuated traffic signal control. The Quaker Road northbound approach
provides individual left-turn, through, and right-turn lanes, the southbound
approach provides a left-turn lane and a through lane. The eastbound Garvey
Auto Body driveway approach provides a single lane for shared travel
movements. The westbound Quaker Ridge Boulevard approach to the
intersection which provides access to the new Walmart includes a left-turn lane
and a shared through/right-turn lane. There are no pedestrian accommodations
at the intersection.

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 12
 Quaker Road/Dix Avenue – This is a four-way in tersection operating under
actuated traffic signal control. The intersection is part of a time-based
coordinated system with traffic signals located to the south on Quaker Road.
These two roadways intersect at an approximate 45 degree angle creating
obtuse and acute turning maneuvers. The eastbound Dix Avenue approach
provides individual left-turn, through, and right-turn lanes. The westbound Dix
Avenue approach provides a shared left-turn/through lane and a right-turn lane.
The northbound and southbound Quaker Avenue approaches to the intersection
each provide an individual left-turn lane and a shared through/right-turn lane
with painted divisional islands for the right turns. There are no pedestrian
accommodations at the intersection.

 Lower Dix Avenue/Highland Avenue
– This is a Y-shaped intersection operating
under stop sign control on the northbound Highland Avenue approach. All
approaches to the intersection provide a single lane for shared travel
movements. There are no pedestrian accommodations at the intersection.

 Queensbury Avenue/Dix Avenue
– This is a four-way intersection operating
under actuated traffic signal control. Each approach to the intersection provides
a single lane for shared travel movements. There are no pedestrian
accommodations at the intersection.

 Queensbury Avenue/Stone Quarry Road
– This is a three-way intersection
operating under stop sign control on the westbound Stone Quarry Road
approach. Each approach to the intersec tion provides a single lane for shared
travel movements. There are no pedestrian accommodations at the intersection.

 Queensbury Avenue/Hicks Road/Casey Road
– This is a four-way intersection
operating under all-way stop sign control. The eastbound Hicks Road and
westbound Casey Road approaches roads have larger stop signs located on both
sides of the roadway approaching the in tersection calling greater attention to
the traffic control. All intersection appr oaches provide a single lane for shared
travel movements. There are no pedestrian accommodations at the intersection.

 Ridge Road/Hicks Road
– This is a three-way intersection operating under stop
sign control on the westbound Hicks Road approach. Each approach to the
intersection provides a single lane for shared travel movements. There are no
pedestrian accommodations at the intersection.

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 13
3. Existing Traffic Characteristics
Available traffic volume s data was researched and utilized for this study. Additional
counts were conducted in September at the recently opened Walmart, and the airport
driveway and Stone Quarry Road intersections with Queensbury Avenue. The
additional data was used to
supplement the existing data and to
confirm growth in the study area. The
2011 Existing Traffic Volumes are
summarized on Figures 2.1 and 2.2.

Table II.1 summarizes the traffic
volume data corresponding to the
daily traffic volume data available for
the count locations shown on the
aerial image to the right. It is noted
that the afternoon peak hour volumes
are higher than the morning peak
hour volumes. Therefore, the
afternoon peak hour is considered the
critical peak hour and is represented
in Table II.1.

The table shows that daily traffic
volumes in the study area vary by
location. Design Hour Volumes (PM
peak hour) represent between 9% and
10% of daily traffic volumes. The peak
direction of travel is only slightly
higher than the off-peak direction,
and truck percentage s range from 3%
to 9% of two-way traffic volumes.

Table II.1 – Traffic Volume Summary
Roadway AADT DHV K DDHV D Trucks
Quaker Road 17,925* 1,735 9.7% 900 52% SEB 7%
Dix Avenue 14,850* 1,390 9.4% 705 51% EB 9%
Queensbury Avenue 3,025** 295 9.8% 175 59% SB 3%
Hicks Road 3,825** 345 9.0% 175 51% WB 3%
Ridge Road 6,425* 620 9.6% 355 57% NB 5%
* AADT from NYSDOT traffic volume data
** AADT estimate from non-NYSDOT automatic traffic recorder count
K = Peak hour volume as a percent of daily volume
DDHV = Directional design hour volume
D = Percent of traffic in predominant direction during PM Peak

4. Traffic Operations
Intersection Level of Service (LOS) and capacity analysis relate traffic volumes to the
physical characteristics of an intersection. Intersection evaluations were made using

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 14
Synchro7 software which automates the procedures contained in the 2000 Highway
Capacity Manual. Evaluations were also completed using SimTraffic7 simulation
software. Levels of service range from A to F with level of service A conditions
considered excellent with very little delay while level of service F generally represents
conditions with very long delays. Table II.2 summarizes levels of service and the
corresponding delay range for unsignalized and signalized intersections.
Table II.2 – 2011 Level of Service Ranges
Control Delay (sec/veh) Level of
Service Unsignalized Intersection Signalized Intersection
A < 10.0 < 10.0 B >10.0 and < 15.0 >10.0 and < 20.0 C >15.0 and < 25.0 >20.0 and < 35.0 D >25.0 and < 35.0 >35.0 and < 55.0 E >35.0 and < 50.0 >55.0 and < 80.0 F >50.0 >80.0

Table II.3 summarizes the existing overall levels of service at the study intersections
during the morning and afternoon peak periods.

Table II.3 – 2011 Existing Levels of Service
Intersection Control AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour
Quaker Rd/Ridge Rd Signal B (18.7) C (21.0)
Quaker Rd/Quaker Ridge Rd Signal B (14.9) B (19.1)
Quaker Rd/Dix Ave Signal C (30.8) D (49.7)
Lower Dix Ave/Highland Ave TW stop C (16.1) C (19.2)
Lower Dix Ave/Queensbury Ave Signal A (9.4) B (11.7)
Queensbury Ave/Stone Quarry Rd TW stop B (10.5) B (10.8)
Queensbury Ave/Airport Driveway TW stop A (9.4) B (10.9)
Queensbury Ave/Hicks Rd/Casey Rd AW stop A (8.3) A (9.1)
Hicks Rd/Ridge Rd TW stop B (13.7) C (17.2)
TW, AW = Two-way or All-way stop controlled intersection
X (Y.Y) = Level of Service (average delay in seconds per vehicle)

Table II.3 shows that the intersections operate at level of service C or better during the
AM peak hour and level of service D or better during the PM peak hour, indicating that
all intersections operate at acceptable levels of service under existing conditions. The
results of the existing condit ions capacity and levels of service analysis confirm that
the PM peak hour is the critical design hour in the study area. Therefore, future
conditions analysis will be comp leted only for the PM peak hour.

Field observations noted that the southbound Quaker Road approach to Dix Avenue
backs up through Quaker Ridge Road during the PM peak hour. Although the
intersection operates at LOS D overall, lo ng delays occur daily on this southbound
approach and improvements should be considered.

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 15
5. Existing Travel Times
Several travel times were documented
during the PM peak hour for use in the
alternatives analysis to determine
accessibility in the study area. The
image to the right shows the
approximate point of equal travel time
on Queensbury Avenue when
travelling to the Ridge Road/Quaker
Road intersection (b lue) and travelling
from the Ridge Road/Quaker Road
intersection (green). The horizontal
lines crossing Queensbury Avenue
represent the point of equal travel
time. For example, when travelling
from the “equal” point on Queensbury
Avenue, it takes 6 minutes and 16
seconds to reach the Ridge
Road/Quaker Road intersection. Since
the “equal” point on Queensbury
Avenue is located south of the
entrance to the airport, the data
shows that it is quicker to travel to
and from the airport by utilizing Hicks
and Ridge Roads around the north
side of the airport, which is the signed
route to the airport. The data also
shows that it is quicker to travel to and from the Queensbury Business Park by
traveling around the south side of the airpor t. The change to this accessibility as a
result of the connector road alternatives is discussed in Section IV.C.3.

6. Bike and Pedestrian Accommodations
Pedestrians and cyclists in the study area face multiple issues, including a lack of
sidewalks, crosswalks, and buffering from traffic. Wide intersections that lack
crosswalks, sidewalks, and pedestrian signals make it difficult for pedestrians to cross
roadways. In addition, while Quaker Road generally has wide shoulders that
accommodate bicycles, the remainder of the study roadways generally have narrow
shoulders making navigating the area difficult for bicyclists.

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 16

7. Crash History
Crash data was obtained to determine crash trends along the study area roadways.
Crash data was provided by NYSDOT for the latest three years of available data. The
Accident Location Information System (ALIS) data is available for the period from
January 1, 2008 through January 31, 2011 for all of the ro adways in the study area.
Table II.4 summarizes the crash history in the area.

Table II.4 – Crash History from January 1, 2008 through January 31, 2011
Roadway Segment* Number of
Crashes
Crash Rate
(Crashes/MEV)
Statewide Average
Crash Rate
Quaker Road:
Ridge Road to Dix Avenue 30 1.80 2.88
Dix Avenue:
Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue 64 7.87 2.88
Queensbury Avenue*:
Dix Avenue to Hicks Road
31 3.92 2.47
Hicks Road*:
Ridge Road to Queensbury Avenue 4 2.30 2.47
Ridge Road*:
Hicks Road to Quaker Road 27 2.30 2.88
*It is noted that the character of county and town highways may be different than state highways. Therefore, the
comparison to the statewide average crash rate may not be as applicable for county and town highways.

The table shows that two segments have crash rates higher than the statewide average:
Queensbury Avenue from Dix Avenue to Hicks Road and Dix Avenue from Quaker Road
to Queensbury Avenue. Typically, only areas with crash rates exceeding the statewide
average by a statistically significant margin are selected for further analysis. For this
planning study, it is noted that the Dix Avenue roadway segment experienced a crash
rate more than 2.5 times the statewide average. The NYSDOT is aware of the condition
and has designed pavement marking channelization improvements which will be
installed to align northbound Highland Ave motorists at a 90 degree angle to Dix
Avenue which may be beneficial. Should the NYSDOT reconstruct Route 32 in this area
Narrow shoulders on Dix Avenue at Highland
Avenue make bicycle and pedestrian travel
difficult. Wide shoulders on Quaker Road allowing for
bicycle travel al
ong the roadway.

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 17
sometime in the future, additional improvements such as a left turn lane on Dix
Avenue should be considered at that time.

8. Existing Transit Service
Greater Glens Falls Transit (GGFT)
provides year-round fixed route
public transit, and ADA
complementary paratransit
services in the study area. The
image to the right shows the fixed
route service in the area. Transit
Route 4, identified by the blue pins
and route, travels through the
study area. In addition, the GGFT
base of operations facility is
located on Queensbury Avenue
near the Floyd Bennett Memorial
Airport.

C) Public Meeting and
Workshop #1
A public meeting and workshop for
the Quaker Road to Queensbury
Avenue Connector Road Study was
held on September 29, 2011 at the
South Queensbury Fire
Department. The purpose of the meeting was to introduce the study to the public,
outline project goals, existing conditions and growth potential in the study area, and
receive input from the public regarding issu es and opportunities in the study area.

The workshop began with a PowerPoint presentation after which community members
were divided into facilitated groups. Partic ipants were specifically asked to identify
problems and opportunities for multimodal transportation improvements. Each
facilitator then summarized the problems and opportunities identified by the small
groups. In general, there was strong support for fixing existing deficiencies including
optimizing the existing system at the Quaker Road/Dix Avenue signalized intersection
and mitigating the left turn congestion at the lower Dix Avenue/Highland Avenue
intersection. There was neither strong support nor opposition to the connector road
concept. Several trade-offs, benefits and im pacts were mentioned. Some participants
noted the potential for increased traffic through the neighborhood on lower
Queensbury Avenue, while others noted it could reduce truck traffic in the same area.
Meeting attendees also voiced little support for pedestrian-specific improvements like
sidewalks, crosswalks, and pedestrian signals citing low density, few users, and scarce
resources that could be better used elsewhere.

The results from the first public workshop were considered when developing the
improvement alternatives discussed in the following section. Appendix B contains a
detailed summary of Public Workshop #1.

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 20
III. Future Conditions
Future traffic volume conditions in the study area were estimated based upon
information provided by the Study Advisory Committee. Two future conditions were
developed: a short-term gr owth scenario (2015) and a long-term growth scenario
(2035). Those scenarios are identified below:

 Short-term growth scenario (2015)
o 0.5% background growth per year from 2011 to 2015
o construction of the Emergency Services Training Center
o construction of the Quaker Ridge Technology Park (Phase 1 only)
 Long-term growth scenario (2035)
o all components from the short-term growth scenario
o 0.5% background growth per year from 2015 to 2035
o modest growth at the airport
o construction of the Quaker Ridge Technology Park (Phase 2)
o construction at the Queensbury Business Park (50% build-out)
o construction at the Airport Industrial Park (70% build-out)

These growth scenarios result in annual growth rates of approximately 2% per year for
the short-term growth scenario and between 1.5% and 2% per year for the long-term
growth scenario. That equates to general traffic increases on study area roadways of
8% over the next four years an d an additional 35% by 2035.

As noted previously, the PM peak hour was identified as the critical design hour. As
such, future traffic volumes were developed for the PM peak hour for the 2015 and
2035 design conditions and are show n on Figures 3.1 and 3.2.

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 23
IV. Alternatives Evaluation
A) Future Conditions
As noted in Section II.B.4, the Quaker Road/Dix Avenue intersection currently operates
with significant vehicle queuing and delay on the southbound Quaker Road approach
to Dix Avenue during the typical PM peak hour. Traffic extends from that intersection
through the adjacent Quaker Road/Quake r Ridge Boulevard, causing additional
disruptions. Evaluations show that modifying the left-turn signal phasing at the
Quaker Road/Dix Avenue intersection would improve overall traffic operations. The
intersection currently operates with lagging left-turns (the left-turn movement happens
after the through movement) on the Quaker Road approaches. Analysis shows that
changing the phasing to provide leading left-turns (the left-turn movement happens
before the through movement) would improve operations. With the signal phasing
change, vehicle queues would no longer interfere with operations at the Quaker
Road/Quaker Ridge Boulevard intersection.

Implementation of the signal timing improvements that are necessary to correct
existing traffic deficiencies at this intersection would also provide for acceptable
operations through the 2015 conditions that include construction of Phase 1 of the
Quaker Ridge Technology Park and the Emergency Service Training Center. No
additional capacity-related improvements are needed for this timeframe.

Additional study of 2035 conditions shows that this same recommendation to optimize
the existing signal will provide adequate traffic operations through 2035 if only Phase
1 of the Quaker Ridge Technology Park is developed. Full build of the QRTC would
necessitate substantial improvements to the nearby surface transportation system.

The traffic impact study (TIS) prepared for the Quaker Ridge Technology Park identified
several study area roadway improvements associated with construction of Phase 2 of
the tech park. These improvements are project-related mitigation and, therefore, are
included in the future 2035 analysis and are referred to in this document as
“Improvements by Others”. These Improvements by Others, as identified in the TIS
prepared for the tech park, include:

 widening Quaker Road to include two full through lanes in each direction for
about ½ mile from approximately 500 feet north of Quaker Ridge Boulevard to
approximately 500 feet south of Dix Avenue
 construction of a second eastbound left-turn lane on Quaker Road at Quaker
Ridge Boulevard
 construction of a second southbound left-turn lane on Quaker Ridge Boulevard
at Quaker Road
 construction of a second southbound left-turn lane on Quaker Road at Dix
Avenue
 widening Dix Avenue to include two lanes eastbound leaving the Quaker Road
intersection to receive the dual lane southbound left-turn movement and taper
back to one lane after approximately 500 feet
 construction of a 150 foot eastbound left-turn lane on Dix Avenue at
Queensbury Avenue

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 24
 modifying the traffic signal at the Quaker Road intersections with Quaker Ridge
Boulevard and Dix Avenue as necessary to accommodate the roadway widening
 implementation of signal timing adjustments throughout the study area to
maximize operations

While specific roadway improvements were identified in the QRTP TIS to mitigate
project impacts, the project has not received site plan approval. This means that the
improvements identified in the QRTP TIS are not finalized and additional improvements
may be required for mitigation. The connector road study assumes that only those
improvements identified in the QRTP study would be required for site mitigation.

B) Description of Alternatives
This study evaluates two primary alternativ es to accommodate future transportation
conditions in the study area; (1) upgrade the existing transportation network and (2)
construct an additional vehicle connection between Quaker Road and Queensbury
Avenue. Several options for that conceptual connection were identified along various
alignments as shown on Figure 4.1. Based on discussions with the Advisory
Committee, anticipated traffic volumes and the setting of the new roadway, the
following design criteria were established for the conceptual roadway alignments.

 Rural – generally open drainage (not curbed)

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 25
 Design Speed – 45 mph (posted speed 40 mph)
 12 foot wide travel lanes – based on anticipated truck use and higher site traffic
volumes
 6 foot wide paved shoulder (bike accommo dations require 4 ft shoulder (min);
pedestrian accommodations on shoulder require 5 ft (min))

The following alternatives are included for further evaluation to accommodate the
2035 future condition includin g full development of QRTP. These improvements are
only needed with construction of Phase 2 of the Quaker Ridge Technology Park.
Preliminary analysis of the connector road showed that the construction of a connector
road without improvements to the existing roadway network resulted in poor
operations at many of the study area inte rsections as shown in the level of service
table in Section IV.C.2. Therefore, the connector road alternatives include
improvements to the existing roadway network to provide acceptable intersection
operations.

1. Alternative 1: Upgrade Improvements by Others
This alternative involves upgrades to the existing network beyond those identified in
the QRTP study. The additional improvements include:
 construct a northbound left-turn lane on Quaker Road at Sanford Street
 construct a westbound left-turn lane on Dix Avenue at Highland Avenue
 construct a westbound left-turn lane on Dix Avenue at Queensbury Avenue
opposite the eastbound left-turn lane proposed in the QRTP study.

2. Alternative 2: Construction on Northern Alignment
In addition to the implementation of the Improvements by Others, this alternative
involves the construction of a two-lane roadway from an extension of Sanford Street at
Quaker Road intersecting Qu eensbury Avenue about 1/3 mile (1,650 feet) north of
Stone Quarry Road. This alignment would require these additional improvements:
 install a traffic signal at the Quaker Road/Sanford Street/Connector Road
intersection
 construct northbound and southbound left-turn lanes on Quaker Road at the
connector road intersection
 construct a westbound left-turn lane on Dix Avenue at Highland Avenue
 construct a westbound left-turn lane on Dix Avenue at Queensbury Avenue to
mirror the eastbound left-turn lane
 construct a southbound left-turn lane on Queensbury Avenue at Dix Avenue

It is noted that with this alternative, the second southbound left-turn lane on Quaker
Road at Quaker Ridge Boulevard identified in the QRTP study is not needed.

3. Alternative 3A: Construction on Central Alignment
In addition to the implementation of the Improvements by Others, this alternative
involves the construction of a two-lane roadway intersecting Quaker Road near the
National Grid driveway and intersecting Queensbury Av enue about 1/3 mile (1,650
feet) north of Stone Quarry Road. This alignment would require these additional
improvements:

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 26
 install a traffic signal at the Quaker Road/National Grid Driveway/Connector
Road intersection
 construct northbound and southbound left-turn lanes on Quaker Road at the
connector road intersection
 construct a northbound left-turn lane on Quaker Road at Sanford Street
 construct a westbound left-turn lane on Dix Avenue at Highland Avenue
 construct a westbound left-turn lane on Dix Avenue at Queensbury Avenue to
mirror the eastbound left-turn lane
 construct a southbound left-turn lane on Queensbury Avenue at Dix Avenue

It is noted that with this alternative, the second southbound left-turn lane on Quaker
Road at Quaker Ridge Boulevard identified in the QRTP study is not needed.

4. Alternative 3B: Construction on Central Alignment with Relocated Stone
Quarry Road
In addition to the implementation of the Improvements by Others, this alternative
involves the construction of a two-lane roadway intersecting Quaker Road near the
National Grid driveway and intersecting Queensbury Avenue at a relocated Stone
Quarry Road intersection. This alignment would require these additional
improvements:
 install a traffic signal at the Quaker Road/National Grid Driveway/Connector
Road intersection
 construct northbound and southbound left-turn lanes on Quaker Road at the
connector road intersection
 construct a northbound left-turn lane on Quaker Road at Sanford Street
 construct a westbound left-turn lane on Dix Avenue at Highland Avenue
 construct a westbound left-turn lane on Dix Avenue at Queensbury Avenue to
mirror the eastbound left-turn lane
 construct a southbound left-turn lane on Queensbury Avenue at Dix Avenue
 Relocate the Stone Quarry Road intersection with Queensbury Avenue
approximately 525 feet north of the existing intersection

It is noted that with this alternative, the second southbound left-turn lane on Quaker
Road at Quaker Ridge Boulevard identified in the QRTP study is not needed.

5. Alternative 4A: Constructi on on Southern Alignment
In addition to the implementation of the Improvements by Others, this alternative
involves the construction of a two-lane roadway extending from Quaker Ridge
Boulevard and intersecting Queensbury Avenue at the existing Stone Quarry Road
intersection. This alignment would require these additional improvements:
 construct a northbound left-turn lane on Quaker Road at Sanford Street
 construct a westbound left-turn lane on Dix Avenue at Highland Avenue
 construct a westbound left-turn lane on Dix Avenue at Queensbury Avenue to
mirror the eastbound left-turn lane
 construct a southbound left-turn lane on Queensbury Avenue at Dix Avenue

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 27
6. Alternative 4B: Construction on Southern Alignment with Relocated Stone
Quarry Road
In addition to the implementation of the Improvements by Others, this alternative
involves the construction of a two-lane roadway extending from Quaker Ridge
Boulevard and intersecting Queensbury Avenue at a relocated Stone Quarry Road
intersection. This alignment would require these additional improvements:
 construct a northbound left-turn lane on Quaker Road at Sanford Street
 construct a westbound left-turn lane on Dix Avenue at Highland Avenue
 construct a westbound left-turn lane on Dix Avenue at Queensbury Avenue to
mirror the eastbound left-turn lane
 construct a southbound left-turn lane on Queensbury Avenue at Dix Avenue
 relocate the Stone Quarry Road intersection with Queensbury Avenue
approximately 525 feet north of the existing intersection

C) Alternatives Evaluation
The alternatives were evaluated based on 2035 levels of service, travel time
comparisons, environmental impacts, and an overall impacts comparison. These
criteria, in addition to overall cost, provide a thorough gauge of potential benefits and
impacts associated with each of the improvement alternatives.

1. Environmental Impacts
Hazardous Waste and Contaminated Materials
As noted previously, petroleum compounds exceeding cleanup objectives appear to
remain near the Dix Avenue/Queensbury Avenue intersection. In addition, petroleum
releases have occurred near the Dix Avenue/Quaker Road intersection. Many of the
businesses in this section of the study area, particularly the Hess Gas Station and
Stewart’s, which are still in operation, involve the sale or use of petroleum products
and have a history of spills or leaks. As a result, it is highly probable that petroleum
contaminated soils exist in this area. If addi tional right-of-way will be acquired or deep
excavations are necessary to improve the roadway network near these businesses,
additional investigations/studies should be performed to determine the potential to
encounter contaminated materials.

Two incidents were identified in the EDR Report that occurred at locations that could
impact construction of a connector road. The location of the first incident occurred at
Garden Time, a landscape/nursery business (Site 20 on the EDR map in Appendix A).
Garden Time is located on the west side of Quaker Road, near the Alternative 3A
intersection terminus with Quaker Road. The incident involved repeated spilling of
petroleum fuel on the bare ground (no pad) at a storage tank where equipment is
fueled. Since the gradient in this area slopes in the direction opposite of the
Alternative 3A western terminus of the connector road, this incident is not expected to
represent a concern. The second incident occurred midpoint between Quaker Road
and Queensbury Avenue within or south of the overhead utility line right-of-way, which
is present within the study area. This incident involved the discharge of a fire
suppression system; the fire suppression material was determined to be a non-
petroleum, non-hazardous substance. As a result, this incident is not expected to
represent a concern relative to the connector road project.

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 28
Wetlands
All of the connector road alternatives have the potential to impact NYSDEC, NWI or field
observed wetlands. Therefore, wetland boundaries would have to be delineated to
determine impacts and identify permit requirements. It is important to note that the
portions of HF-3 that would be affected by a connector road do not contain the cedar
swamp or marl fen wetland habitat types, just hardwood swamp (i.e., palustrine forest
broad-leaved deciduous (Cowardin et al. 1979)).

Measures should be taken during subsequent design phases to avoid and minimize
wetland impacts to the extent practicable. Impacts to federally-regulated wetlands will
require authorization under Se ction 404 of the Clean Water Act in the form of a USACE
permit. Impacts to areas mapped as state we tlands (or within the 100-ft buffer) also
require authorization under Article 24 of the Environmental Conservation Law and
Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. Compensatory mitigation is required by the USACE
for wetland impacts that exceed 0.10 of an acre; it is anticipated that some form of
mitigation would be required by the NYSDEC for any impact to Wetlands HF-8 or HF-3.

Ecology and Endangered/Threatened Species
The only alternative that will affect the note d Indiana bat habitat is Alternative 2. If
Alternative 2 is progressed as a feasible alternative, further study of its effects on
Indiana bat habitat is recommended, specifically at and near its western terminus
(Quaker Road/East Sanford Street Intersection).

As noted previously, karner blue butterflies inhabit extensive pine barrens, oak
savannas or openings in oak woodlands, and open areas, such as airports and right-of-
ways, that the support eh growth of lupine. The areas that would be affected by a
proposed connector road do not have pine barrens, oak savannas, or oak openings
present. An open right-of-way and successional old fields do exist; however, evidence
of lupine growing in either type of area was not observed. Additionally, the right-of-
way and adjacent successional old fields showed signs of frequent on-going
disturbance from the operation of all-terrain vehicles and automobiles capable of being
driven off-road. Since a segment of Alternative 3A and all of Alternative 3B/4B have
been sited adjacent to the right-of-way, further study regarding the effects of the
project on karner blue butterflies is not nece ssary. Certain segments of Alternative 4A
cross the right-of-way, connecting to Alternative 3B/4B; based on the disturbed state of
the habitat and the lack of lupine, further study with regard to the karner butterfly is
not anticipated to be necessary.

The marl fen, identified by NYSDEC as a significant ecological community, is
contiguous with New York State Freshwater Wetland HF-3, parts of which would be
transected by Alternative 2. However, the marl fen is adjacent to the Runway 1 End of
Runway 1-19. Open marl flats and marl pools formerly occurred between the runway
and HF-3, a rich swamp comprised of a Cedar swamp and hardwood swamp, prior to
being ditched for agricultural purposes and extensive pumping of the ground water.
Alternative 2 would transect portions of HF-3 that only contain the hardwood swamp
plant community and not the cedar swamp or marl fen communities. As such, further
coordination with the NYSDEC regarding the identified significant ecology community
is anticipated to be minimal.

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 29
Historic/Archaeological Resources
As noted previously, a review of the NYSOPRHP GIS mapping has determined that the
entire project study area is mapped as potentially archeologically sensitive. As such,
for any areas where new disturbance is proposed, their office may require more
detailed investigations. A project review request will need to be submitted to SHPO
regarding the potential for historic/cultural impacts.

2. Levels of Service
Table IV.1 summarizes the PM peak hour levels of service for the various alternatives at
each of the study intersections. The “No Improvements” column represents conditions
in the study area that would occur with th e volumes associated with the full build 2035
conditions, but not the improvements associated with the QRTP. The results in this
column are intended to provide a base comparison of the impact that the Quaker Ridge
Technology Park will have on study area op erations. The levels of service and delay
identified in italics are those intersections or approaches that are expected to operate
at level of service E conditions. The le vels of service and delay identified in bold are
those intersections or approaches that are expected to operate at level of service F
conditions.

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 30
Table IV.1 – 2035 PM Peak Hour Levels of Service
Intersection
Control No
Improvements Construct Connector
Road
Improvements by Others

Alternative 1 Upgrade
Improvements By Others Alternative 2
Northern Alignment
Alternative 3A
Central Alignment Alternative 3B
Central Alignment Alternative 4A
Southern Alignment Alternative 4B
Southern Alignment
Quaker Rd/Ridge Rd S C (24.9) B (17.5) B (18.4) B (18.3) B (19.4) B (17.9) B (18.0) B (18.6) B (18.6) Quaker Rd/Sanford St TW F (104) F (92.9) F (104) F (104) — F (424) F (424) F (92.9) F (92.9) Quaker Rd/Sanford St/
Connector Rd S — — — — B (19.0) — — — —
Quaker Rd/National Grid
Driveway/Connector Rd TW — — — — — B (19.1) B (18.1) — —
Quaker Rd/Quaker Ridge
Blvd S
F (106) F (88.9) C (23.4) C (23.5) B (19.0) B (19.9) C (20.3) C (23.4) C (23.5)
Quaker Rd/Dix Ave S F (188) F (86.4) C (29.8) C (27.9) C (29.6) C (27.7) C (27.8) C (28.0) C (28.0) Lower Dix Ave/Highland
Ave TW
F (70) C (21.9) E (40.9) E (40.9) C (22.3) C (22.3) C (22.3) C (21.9) C (21.9)
Lower Dix Ave/
Queensbury Ave S
F (82.8) D (45.4) B (18.7) B (19.7) C (20.6) C (34.5) C (20.6) C (21.0) C (21.0)
Queensbury Ave/Stone
Quarry Rd TW C (15.5)
— C (15.5) C (15.5) C (17.4) C (17.4) — — —
Queensbury Ave/Stone
Quarry Rd/Connector Rd TW —
F (57.4) — — — — F (57.6) F (57.4) F (57.4)
Queensbury Ave/
Connector Rd TW — — — —
F (55.0) F (55.0) — — —
Queensbury Ave/Airport
Driveway TW B (12.7) B (14.2) B (12.7) B (12.7) B (14.7) B (14.7) B (14.7) B (14.2) B (14.2)
Queensbury Ave/Hicks
Rd/ Casey Rd AW B (11.7) B (13.5) B (11.7) B (11.7) B (13.0) B (13.0) B (13.0) B (13.5) B (13.5)
Hicks Rd/Ridge Rd
TW E (41.0) E (49.9) E (41.0) E (41.0) E (39.4) E (39.4) E (39.4) E (49.9) E (49.9)
S, TW, AW = Signal, Two-way or A ll-way stop controlled intersection
X (Y.Y) = Level of Service (average delay in seconds per vehicle)
— = Not Applicable for this condition
The level of service and delay at two-way stop controlled intersections is shown for the contro lled approach with the longest delay

The analysis shows that without construction of roadway improvements, five of the
nine study intersections will operate at leve l of service F conditions. That indicates
that area-wide improvements are needed to accommodate the future 2035 conditions
(“No Imps” column). As noted previously, these improvements are only needed with
construction of the QRTP Ph ase 2. The “Construct Connector Road” column shows
levels of service at the study intersections with construction of the connector road, but
no other improvements. With construction of the connector road, three of the nine
study intersections will operate at level of service F conditions. That indicates the
connector road would provide some operational benefit to the transportation network,
but that operational deficiencies would still exist and further improvements to the
transportation network are needed to a ccommodate the future 2035 conditions.

With construction of the “Improvements by Others” the study area intersections
generally operate with good levels of service at all intersections. As noted previously,
the “Improvements by Others” does not include construction of a connector road.
Alternative 1 expands slightly on the “Imp rovements by Others” resulting in very
similar levels of service.

Comparison of Alternatives 2 through 4B show that the study area intersections will
generally operate under comparable levels of service regardless of which new roadway

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 31
alternative is implemented. In addition, the levels of service for the connector road
alternatives are similar to the levels of service for Alternative 1 which does not include
a connector road. Typically, to warrant the investment of public transportation funds,
there should be a marked improvement to operations with construction of a connector
road rather than the comparable levels of service noted in Table IV.1. It is worth
noting that the Quaker Road/Quaker Ridge Boulevard intersection operates with
comparable levels of delay (about 20 second s) whether the Connector Road intersects
Quaker Road through Quaker Ridge Boulevard or through another location (Alt 2 or Alt
3). This is because the double left turn lane is not needed at Quaker Ridge Boulevard
for Alternatives 2 and 3.

3. Travel Time Comparisons
Travel time is a measure of
accessibility and was used to
determine the access benefits
associated with the proposed
connection. Regional travelers
will only use the new
connection if it provides a time
savings benefit. The existing
travel time data and SimTraffic
simulation models were used to
determine whether any of the
proposed alignments will
provide a time savings for
individuals trav elling to and
from the west on Quaker Road.

Travel time comparisons were
completed for the shortest and
longest roadway alignment
alternatives, Alternative 4A
(0.59 miles) and Alternative 2
(1.12 miles). The image to the
right shows that as the
alignment of the Connector
Road moves north, the point of
equal travel time moves north.
For example, Alternative 2
(shown in green) would
improve travel times (access) to

the airport because the point of
equal travel time is north of the
airport, whereas Alternative 4A
would not improve travel times to the airport as it would still be faster to travel around
the north side of the airport along Hicks Road.

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 32
Overall, the access benefits of the new connector road are small. There would be some
improved access to the Queensbury Business Park (on the order of 15 to 90 seconds)
depending on the specific alternative.

4. Overall Evaluation
Table IV.2 provides additional comparison cr iteria and a more complete evaluation of
potential benefits and impacts. The summary includes potential environmental and
right-of-way impacts as well as overall estimated costs which account for contingency,
engineering, acquisition, inspection, administration, permitting, and construction.

Table IV.2 – Alternatives Comparison Summary
Alt 3A Alt 3B Alt 4A Alt 4B Criteria Improvements by Others Alt 1 Upgrade IBO
Alt 2 Northern Central Southern
Overall Length of Improvements NA 1.12 Miles
2.24 Lane- Miles 0.95 Miles
1.9 Lane- Miles 1 Mile
2 Lane-Miles 0.59 Miles
1.18 Lane- Miles 0.66 Miles
1.32 Lane- Miles
Existing and Forecasted Operating Conditions Capacity and delay (ETC+20) 96 hours
29 mph
PI = 133.5 87 hours
30 mph
PI = 115.9 95 hours
29 mph
PI = 124.7 112 hours
28 mph
PI = 144.3 105 hours
28 mph
PI = 136.2 90 hours
30 mph
PI = 119.3 90 hours
30 mph
PI =119.4
Safety benefit NA Yes Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Improve emergency access NA No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Improve area access (Airport and Business Parks) NA No Medium Medium Medium Low Low Improve multi-modal access
No No Low No No High High Improve balloon festival circulation NA No Medium Medium Medium Low Low
Impacts to Natural Resources Wetland impacts (approximate) None Low 2.5 acres 0.75 acres 1.0 acres 1.5 acres 1.75 acres 100-year floodplain impacts None None None None None None None Potential to impact archeological sites None Low High Medium Low Low Low Impact to forested areas None Low High High Medium Medium Medium Impact to protected farmland None None None None None None None
Costs/Benefits Maintenance cost ranking (1=lowest) — 1 6 5 4 2 3 Property impacts (ROW implications)
None Unknown 6 prop.
(15.1 acres) 5 prop.
(13.6 acres) 4 prop.
(15.4
acres)* 5 prop.
(10.3 acres) 4 prop
(12 acres)*
Fuel consumption & emissions 531 gal
37.1 kg CO 495 gal
34.6 kg CO 517 gal
36.1 kg CO 541 gal
37.8 kg CO 529 gal
37.0 kg CO 526 gal
36.8 kg CO 525 gal
36.7 kg CO Consistent with local plans Yes –
Development Mitigation Yes –
Maintain / Enhance Existing
Infrastructure

Low Low Low Moderate Low
Construction cost (includes ROW) $11.4 M $2.9 M $10.4 M $10.2 M $8.9 M $6.1 M $6.7 M
* Assumes a land swap for realignment of Stone Quarry Road rather than right-of-way acquisition

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 33
Several conclusions are evident from this alternatives comparison:

 Of the six alternatives, Alternative 1 (U pgrade Improvements by Others) has the
fewest impacts, best operations, and lowe st cost. The PI value in the “Capacity
and Delay” row of the table refers to the “Performance Index” from the traffic
simulation model and represents a combination of delay, stops and queuing
penalty. A lower PI indicates better ov erall operations. Alternative 1 has the
lowest overall PI.
 Of the five Connector Road alternatives, Alternative 4A appears to have the best
balance of good operations, fewer impacts, and lower costs.
 Alternatives 4A and 4B are shown as having better multi-modal access because
of feedback from Greater Glens Falls Transit that indicated that those
alignments could provide a potential benefit for bus operations and the ability
to serve both Walmart and the Queensbury Business Park.
 As the shortest alternative (0.59 miles), Alternative 4A is expected to have the
lowest maintenance costs and is shown to be somewhat consistent with local
plans because is shares part of its alignment with the proposed Emergency
Services Training Center access, and the County is pursuing a letter of intent
with the QRTP to pursue a road connection.

Based upon the results of the analysis, construction of a connector road is not needed
to mitigate existing or future transportation conditions in the study area. However, if a
connector road is progressed, construction of Alternative 4A provides the greatest
benefit for the lowest cost. Figure 4.2 illu strates a concept plan for Alternative 4A
showing a typical two-lane roadway with wide shoulders to accommodate pedestrians
and bicyclists.

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 36
V. Conclusions, Recommendations, and Implementation
A) Conclusions
The primary conclusion from the connector road evaluation is that a new roadway
connection is not needed to serve current or short-term traffic in the study area. By
modifying the existing traffic signal phasing and timing at the Quaker Road/Dix
Avenue intersection, the anticipated 2015 tr affic volumes can be accommodated with
acceptable levels of service. The 2035 tra ffic volumes can also be accommodated with
this same system optimization, assuming only Phase 1 of the Quaker Ridge Technology
Park is developed.

With full build out of the QRTP by 2035, substantial off-site traffic mitigation will be
needed as identified in the Quaker Ridge Technology Park TIS. These are large-scale
improvements requiring roadway and intersection widening at multiple locations. This
mitigation is referred to as “Improvements by Others” in this study. In addition, the
following “upgrade” to the Improvements by Others will also be needed:

 construction of a northbound left-turn lane on Quaker Road at Sanford Street
 construction of a westbound left-turn lane on Dix Avenue at Highland Avenue
 construction of a westbound left-turn lane on Dix Avenue at Queensbury Avenue
opposite the proposed eastbound left-turn lane recommended in the QRTP
study.

Construction of a connector road would improve access to land along the connector
road, and would provide an overall mobility benefit, but it would not ameliorate the
need for most of the off-site transportation improvements above. The costs of the
roadway appear to outweigh the benefit in terms of a regional transportation
improvement. However, there is a local benefit to having improved access and the
roadway could be pursued as part of site development mitigation. These local benefits
include a small reduction (about 15 to 90 second s) in travel time to and from land uses
along Queensbury Avenue and the connector road, the potential for improved access
to the airport, and additional route option s for emergency vehicles and the travelling
public. If a connector road is progressed, co nstruction of Alternative 4A provides the
greatest benefit for the lowest cost. This alternative avoids or minimizes
environmental impacts while providing the greatest multi-modal transportation benefit.
Again, it is noted that the costs of the roadway outweigh the local and regional
transportation benefits associated with the connector road.

During December 2011, the Warren County Department of Public Works Committee
agreed to pursue a Letter of Intent with the QRTP developer that would in essence
allow the developer to construct an access road along County property to his parcel in
exchange for a navigation easement along the private property, enabling the County to
expand the southern runway at the airport. This study has concluded that public
transportation benefits do not necessitate the need for a connector roadway. However,
Warren County and the Town of Queensbury may decide that the economic benefits
associated with the runway expansion and local access improvements warrant some
level of public funding for the connector road.

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 37
B) Pedestrian, Bicycle, an d Transit Accommodations
Transportation improvement projects should consider the needs of all modes and all
users. Although specific improvements for pedestrians were not noted as a priority by
the public, multi-modal planning is consistent with A/GFTC’s Twelve Principles and is a
requirement of all publicly funded projects. The logical priorities within the study area
include adding pedestrian crossing acco mmodations to traffic signal controlled
intersections, extending the sidewalk from East Field (Haskell Avenue) in the City of
Glens Falls along Dix Avenue to Queensbury Avenue, and insuring the site
development projects are walkable with linkages to logical termini.

Residents could benefit from the construction of sidewalks on Dix Avenue east of
Quaker Road to connect residential uses with commercial uses. East of Highland
Avenue, parcel frontages on Dix Avenue are smaller, front yard setbacks are shorter,
and the existing right-of-way width is narrower. When combined, these can create
major impediments to the construction of sidewalk projects. Although difficult to
complete, sidewalk construction is preferre d, over wide shoulders, along Dix Avenue
east of Quaker Road due to the number of residences in the area. As such, sidewalks
should be pursued as part of any project along Dix Avenue east of Quaker Road.

In areas of low pedestrian and vehicle volume, both pedestrians and bicyclists can be
accommodated through wide shoulders. This type of treatment increases the potential
that pedestrian and bicycle accommodatio ns will be maintained through inclement
weather. If a connector road is pursued, the roadway shoulder should be 6-feet wide
to accommodate pedestrians and bicycles. The roadway should also provide sufficient
lighting to maximize the visibility of these users at night and during other limited
visibility conditions. Any widening of th e existing roadway network should also
include shoulders of sufficient width to accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists or
construction of a sidewalk.

Discussions with representatives with GGFT revealed that a connector road between
Quaker Road and Queensbury Avenue would provide limited benefit to transit service
in the area. To maximize transit potential, development projects should consider
transit needs through the site design and approval process. For example, providing
direct pedestrian connections from the traveled way to the facility, minimizing front
parking, and providing well lit and comfortable transit stops should be considered.

C) Public Meeting and Workshop #2
The second Public Workshop was held on February 7, 2012. The purpose of the
meeting was to outline the conclusions and recommendations from the study and
answer questions from the public regarding those recommendations. The workshop
began with a PowerPoint presentation after which community members were asked to
comment on the study conclusi ons and recommendations.

There continued to be strong support for implementing short-term traffic signal timing
improvements at the Quaker Road/Dicks Avenue intersection. This report encourages
governing agencies to implement the recommended signal phasing and timing
changes especially since the signal phasing changes are a cost effective short-term

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 38
improvement that are sufficient to accommodate existing traffic conditions and
background growth in the study area.

Attendees raised concerns regarding wetlands impacts and any correlating impacts on
individual properties like water in basements, standing water, etc associated with
construction of a connector road. A detailed summary of Public Workshop #2 is
included in Appendix B.

D) Study Recommendations
The Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study resulted in several
recommendations for short-term and long-term implementation. Short-term
recommendations are intended to address existing deficiencies and improve overall
operations in the transportation network.

1. Short-term Recommendations
1. The signal phasing and timing at the Quaker Road/Dix Avenue intersection
should be modified to maximize intersection capacity and reduce southbound
vehicle queuing. This recommendation should be pursued in the short-term to
address existing traffic operations. Wi th this change, the intersection will
operate with good levels of service and southbound vehicle queues will not
impact operations at the Quaker Road/Quaker Ridge Boulevard intersection.
2. Optimizing traffic signal timing is considered a low-cost, high benefit approach
to reducing congestion by the U.S. Depa rtment of Transportation. As such, the
existing time-based coordination plan of the traffic signals on Quaker Road from
Quaker Ridge Boulevard to River Street should be updated and maintained.
While this improvement will not provide a significant level of service benefit to
the minor approaches at the individual intersections, it will provide greater
progression of high volume movements through the corridor which reduce the
number of stopped vehicles, in turn improving air quality and the overall driver
experience. This improvement should be addressed in the short-term.
3. The land use map showed large portions of undeveloped land in the study area.
As commercial and industrial growth occurs on Quaker Road, Dix Avenue, and
Queensbury Avenue, development plans should minimize the number of access
points per parcel and maximize shared driveways and service roads. Minimizing
the number of driveways will help to maximize mobility on area roadways while
still allowing for economic growth and development.
4. The potential to construct a westbound left-turn lane on Dix Avenue at Highland
Avenue should be investigated for feasibility. Due to the na rrow right-of-way on
this section of Dix Avenue, implementation of this improvement may involve
property acquisition. This improvement would remove westbound traffic
waiting to turn left onto Highland Avenue from through moving traffic reducing
vehicle delays.

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Creighton Manning | Shumaker Consulting Engineering & Land Surveying Page 39
2. Long-term Recommendations
1. Major roadway expansions are needed only with Phase 2 construction of the
Quaker Ridge Technology Park. The “Improvements by Others” should be
constructed with the proposed site development, specifically the QRTP.
Additional roadway improvements identified with future build-out of the study
area include construction of a northbound left-turn lane on Quaker Road at
Sanford Street and a westbound left-turn lane on Dix Avenue at Queensbury
Avenue to mirror the proposed eastbound left-turn lane. These improvements
should be constructed as needed with si te development. Specifically, the left-
turn lane at Sanford Street should be constructed before vehicle queues
associated with left-turning traffic significantly impact through travel
movements. This will most likely occur as traffic volumes on Quaker Road
increase with construction of the QRTP. The westbound left-turn lane on Dix
Avenue at Queensbury Avenue should be constructed with development of the
QRTP and the construction of the eastbound left-turn lane identified in the QRTP
TIS.
2. A connector road would primarily benefit the QRTP and is considered here as a
private developer responsibility. However, as noted previously, Warren County
and the Town of Queensbury may determine that a connector road would
provide sufficient economic benefits to allocate some public support for
construction. Should an agreement between Warren County and the developer
of the QRTP result in a new connector road being construction, the roadway
should reflect the design criteria specified in this study. In addition, the
alignment of the roadway should take into account the impacts and benefits
outline herein. In addition, if a connector road is constructed, a southbound
left-turn lane should be constructed on Queensbury Avenue at Dix Avenue. This
is a long-term improvement that is only needed with construction of a connector
road and Phase 2 of the QRTP.

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Appendix A – Environmental Documentation

Quaker Road to Queensbury Av enue Connector Road Study
Town of Queensbury, New York

Environmental Data
Resources, Inc (EDR)
Radius Map

United States Department of the Interior

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
New York Field Office Long Island Field Office
3817 Luker Road, Cortland, NY 13045 3 Old Barto Rd., Brookhaven, NY 11719
Phone: (607) 753-9334 Phone: (631) 776-1401
Fax: (607) 753-9699 Fax: (631) 776-1405

Endangered Species Act List Request Response Cover Sheet

This cover sheet is provided in response to a se arch of our website* for information regarding the
potential presence of species under jurisdiction of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) within a
proposed project area.

Attached is a copy of the New York State Count y List of Threatened, Endangered, and Candidate
Species for the appropriate county(ies). The databa se that we use to respond to list requests was
developed primarily to assist Federal agencies that are consulting with us unde r Section 7(a)(2) of the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) (87 St at. 884, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Our lists include all
Federally-listed, proposed, and candidate species known to occur, as well as those likely to occur, in
specific counties.

The attached information is designed to assist pr oject sponsors or applicants through the process of
determining whether a Federally-lis ted, proposed, or candidate species and/or “critical habitat” may
occur within their pr oposed project area and when it is appropriate to contact our offices for additional
coordination or consultation. You may be aware that our offices have provided much of this
information in the past in proj ect-specific letters. However, due to increasing project review workloads
and decreasing staff, we are now providing as much information as possible through our website. We
encourage anyone requesting species list information to print out all mate rials used in any analyses of
effects on listed, proposed, or candidate species.

The Service routinely updates this da tabase as species are proposed, listed, and delisted, or as we obtain
new biological information or specific presence/a bsence information for listed species. If project
proponents coordinate with the Serv ice to address proposed and candidate species in early stages of
planning, this should not be a problem if these species are eventually listed. However, we recommend
that both project proponents and reviewing agencies retrieve from our online database an updated list
every 90 days to append to this do cument to ensure that listed species presence/absence information for
the proposed project is current.

Reminder: Section 9 of the ESA prohi bits unauthorized taking** of listed species and applies to
Federal and non-Federal activities. For projects not authorized, f unded, or carried out by a Federal
agency, consultation with the Service pursuant to S ection 7(a)(2) of the ESA is not required. However,
no person is authorized to “take **” any listed species without appr opriate authorizations from the
Service. Therefore, we provide technical assistance to individuals and agencies to assist with project
planning to avoid the potential fo r “take**,” or when appropriate, to provide assistance with their
application for an incidental take permit pursuant to Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA.

Additionally, endangered species and their habitats are protected by Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA, which
requires Federal agencies, in consultation with the Serv ice, to ensure that any action it authorizes, funds,
or carries out is not lik ely to jeopardize the continued existenc e of listed species or result in the
destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. An assessment of the potential direct, indirect,
and cumulative impacts is required for all Fede ral actions that may affect listed species.

For instance, work in certain waters of the United States, including wetlands and streams, may require a
permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Cor ps). If a permit is required, in reviewing the
application pursuant to the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 St at. 401, as amended;16 U.S.C. 661
et seq.), the Service may concur, with or without recommending additional permit conditions, or
recommend denial of the permit depending upon potential adverse impacts on fish and wildlife resources
associated with project construction or implementation. The need for a Corps permit may be determined
by contacting the appropriate Corps office(s).*

For additional information on fish and wildlife resour ces or State-listed species, we suggest contacting
the appropriate New York State Department of Envi ronmental Conservation regional office(s) and the
New York Natural Heritage Program Information Services.*

Since wetlands, ponds, streams, or open or sheltered co astal waters may be present in the project area, it
may be helpful to utilize the National Wetlands Inve ntory (NWI) maps as an initial screening tool.
However, they may or may not be available for the project area. Please note that while the NWI maps
are reasonably accurate, they should not be used in lie u of field surveys for determining the presence of
wetlands or delineating wetland boundaries for Federal regulatory purposes. Online information on the
NWI program and digital data can be downloaded from Wetlands Mapper,
http://wetlands.fws.gov/mapper_tool.htm.

Project construction or implementa tion should not commence until all requirements of the ESA have
been fulfilled. After reviewing our website and follo wing the steps outlined, we encourage both project
proponents and reviewing agencies to contact our office to determine whether an accurate determination
of species impacts has been made. If there are any questions about our county lists or agency or project
proponent responsibilities under the ESA, please cont act the New York or Long Island Field Office
Endangered Species Program at the numbers listed above.

Attachment (county list of species)

*Additional information referred to a bove may be found on our website at:
http://www.fws.gov/northeast/nyfo/es/section7.htm

** Under the Act and regulations, it is illegal for any pers on subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to take (includes harass, harm,
pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect; or to attempt any of these), import or export, ship in interstate or foreign
commerce in the course of commercial activity, or sell or offer for sale in interstate or foreign commerce any endangered fish or wildlife
species and most threatened fish and wildlife species. It is al so illegal to possess, sell, deliver, carry, transport, or ship any such wildlife that
has been taken illegally. “Harm” includes any act which actually kills or injures fish or wildlife, and case law has clarified that such acts
may include significant habitat modification or degradation that significantly impairs essential behavioral patterns of fish or wildlife.

Warren County
Federally Listed Endangered and Threa tened Species and Candidate Species
Information current as of: 11/22/2011
This list represents the best available information regarding known or likely County occurrences of Federally-listed and candidate species and is subject to change as new information becomes
available.
Status Codes: E=Endangered, T=Threaten ed, P=Proposed, C=Candidate, D=Delisted.
W=Winter S=Summer
Common Name

Bog turtle (Historic)
Indiana bat (W/S)
Karner blue butterfly Scientific Name
Clemmys [=Glyptemys] muhlenbergii
Myotis sodalis
Lycaeides melissa samuelis Status
T
E
E
Page 1 of 1
Warren County
11/22/2011
http://www.fws.gov/northeast/nyfo/es/CountyLists/WarrenDec2006.htm

Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study Report
March 2012

Appendix B – Public Meeting Summaries

Quaker Road to Queensbury Av enue Connector Road Study
Town of Queensbury, New York

Page 1
Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study
Public Meeting and Workshop
Thursday, September 29, 2011 at 7:00 South Queensbury Fire Department Meeting Summary

The workshop began with an introduction by Aaron Frankenfeld to
introduce the project and explain the MPO’s role in planning and
programming transportation projects in the region. The
Adirondack/Glens Falls Transportation Council (A/GFTC) has
initiated this study to evaluate the viability of a potential roadway
connection between Quaker Road and Queensbury Avenue, along
with other transportation needs in the area. This study will evaluate
conditions in the study area with and without the potential connector
road. The need for a connector road has not been determined yet
and is being evaluated as part of the study.

Creighton Manning outlined the project goals; existing conditions
with respect to transportation and land use; and environmental
features. An area-wide constraints map was also presented.

After the presentation, attendees met in smaller groups with one
facilitator at each of three tables to discuss study area issues. Within
the groups, participants were specif ically asked to identify problems
and opportunities for multimodal transportation improvements. Each
facilitator then summarized the problems and opportunities identified
by the small groups. The maps used at the meeting to take notes
and the meeting sign-in sheet are included with this meeting
summary.

Overall, the meeting was succes sful in that many people attended and provided valuable input.
Attendees raised valid questions about whether a connector road is necessary and if it would help
general traffic conditions in the study area. These are important questions that the Study Advisory
Committee will work to answer thr ough the study period. It was noted that at the conclusion of this
planning study, a set of transportation recommendations will be put forth that will require engineering and
further evaluation.

Workshop Results

Problems:
 Delays and lots of trucks at the Hicks Rd/Ridge Rd intersection
 Delays on Cronin Rd at Ridge Rd
 High speeds on Queensbury Ave from Courtney Ln to Hicks Rd
 Excessive delays at the Dix Ave/Quaker Rd intersection
 Delays at driveways and side streets on Qu aker Rd from Dix Ave to Sanford St
 Sight distance concerns for Ridge Rd southbound to turn left onto Hicks Rd
 A new connector road could impact residential area s by increasing traffic on some sections of
Queensbury Ave
 Truck traffic on Queensbury Ave is heavy
 Wal-Mart signal (Quaker Ridge Blvd) creates back-ups along Quaker Rd
 Pedestrians use Dix Ave more than other area roads and there are limited pedestrian
accommodations for those pedestrians
 No room for walking or biking on Dix Ave and Queensbury Ave
Suggested Improvements:
 Wider shoulders on area roadways, sp ecifically Quaker Rd and Dix Ave
 Four-lane segment on Quaker Rd between utility easement and Dix Ave
 Four-lane segment on Dix Ave approaching Quaker Rd through to Route 4
 Use context sensitive widening (i.e . use the existing shoulder width)

Page 2

Modify the timing at the Quaker Rd/Dix Ave intersection
 Add a turn lane on Dix Ave eastbound approaching Queensbury Ave
 Extension of Sanford Street east? This was an improvement put forth in the past as part of
previous development proposal.
 Upgrade Dix Ave near Highland Ave
 New connector might remove some trucks from residential areas

Questions/Comments/Concerns:
 Right-of-way needs for roadway expansions
 Who would a connector road benefit?
 Would a connector road draw traffic and ther efore customers away from existing businesses?
 Maintain 40 mph on Quaker Rd
 A new connector road could hurt existing industrial parks by causing growth
 A connector road could be too close to airplanes and the southern runway

The information provided by the meeting attendees will be considered through the remainder of the
feasibility study as alternatives are identified and anal yzed. The next public meeting will occur in early
December.

Page 3

Page 4

Page 5

Page 6

Page 7

Page 1
Quaker Road to Queensbury Avenue Connector Road Study
Public Meeting
Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 6:30
South Queensbury Fire Department Meeting Summary

The workshop began with a project update by Aaron Frankenfeld.
The Adirondack/Glens Falls Transportation Council (A/GFTC)
initiated this study to evaluate the viability of a potential roadway
connection between Quaker Road and Queensbury Avenue.
Several alternatives had been evaluated since the last public
meeting and the purpose of this second public meeting was to
present the draft findings and solicit comments. The DRAFT report
is available for review and co mment through February 21, 2012 on
the A/GFTC website at http://www.agftc.org/whats_new.asp
.

Creighton Manning outlined the project goals, summarized existing
conditions, discussed work completed since the first public
meeting, and detailed the study conclusions:
 Considerable improvements would be needed to mitigate
the full build out of the Quaker Ridge Technology Park
 A connector road would not ameliorate the need for most
of the off-site transportation improvements
 As a regional transportation improvement, the cost of a
connector road would outweigh the benefits
 A connector road would provide increased development
potential, improved local access, and emergency services
access
 Alternative 4A, extending from Quaker Ridge Blvd to Stone
Quarry Rd, is the preferre d connector road alternative

The study provided a number of multi-modal (pedest rian, bicycle, bus), short-term, and long-term
recommendations including:
 Multi-modal Recommendations
 Add pedestrian crossing accommodations to traffic signals
 Extend a sidewalk along Dix Ave from East Field in Glens Falls to Queensbury Ave
 Provide wider shoulders for bicyclists and pedestrians on Ridge Rd and Queensbury Ave
where feasible
 Consider transit access in the site approval process (pedestrian linkages to stops, safe
places to wait, etc.)
 Short-term Improvements
 Adjust the signal phasing at the Quaker Rd/Dix Ave intersection
 Update and maintain the time-based signal coordination along Quaker Rd from Quaker Ridge
Blvd to River St
 Implement access management best practices like shared driveways, frontage roads, and
channelization during site approval and development
 Investigate the feasibility of a westbou nd left-turn lane on Dix Ave and Highland Ave
 Long-term Improvements
 Implement development mitigation from Quaker Ridge Technology Park identified in the
traffic impact study
 Construct additional roadway improvements (left- turn lane on Quaker Rd at Sanford St and a
westbound left-turn lane on Dix Ave and Queensbury Ave)

A commenter asked for clarification of the phrase “I mprovements by Others”. It was explained that the
“improvements by others” is the Quaker Ridge Technology Park development mitigation outlined in that
project’s traffic impact study. The same commenter believed that if the connector road was built by the
developer, then the Quaker Ridge Tech Park woul d not need to make improvements to the existing

Page 2
system. It was explained that the connector road al
one does not mitigate the Quaker Ridge Tech Park
traffic, and that additional developer mitigation to the existing system would be needed.

The timing for implementation of short-term improvem ents, specifically signal phasing changes at the Dix
Ave/Quaker Rd was questioned. Aaron noted that A/GFTC is a non-regulatory agency and can’t
complete implementation, but that A/GFTC would enc ourage the governing agencies to make the phasing
improvements. Aaron also noted that implementing sign al phasing changes is surprisingly difficult due to
the few people in the region that can perform the work , and that the signal phasing changes are a cost
effective short-term improvement that are sufficient to accommodate existing traffic conditions and
background growth in the study area.

Attendees raised concerns regarding wetlands impacts and any correlating impacts on individual
properties like water in basements, standing water, et c associated with construction of a connector road.
Concerns were also raised about the amount of potential light industrial space in the area.

The information provided by the meeting attendees wi ll be addressed through finalization of the study
report.