NYS ROUTE 12 CORRIDOR STUDY PHASE II I · 2008-08-23 · NYS ROUTE 12 CORRIDOR STUDY– PRELIMINARY DRAFT SEPTEMBER 2007 PHASE II -9- 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS 2.1 Analysis of Corridor

REVISED DRAFT – PRELIMINARY REPORT

NNYYSS RROOUUTTEE 1122 CCOORRRRIIDDOORR SSTTUUDDYY

PPHHAASSEE II II

Broome, Chenango, Madison & Oneida Counties

Prepared For:

New York State Department of Transportation

Revised - September 2007

NYS ROUTE 12 CORRIDOR STUDY – PRELIMINARY DRAFT SEPTEMBER 2007

PHASE II -2-

DRAFT – PRELIMINARY REPORT

NYS ROUTE 12 CORRIDOR STUDY

PHASE II

December 2006 Prepared For:

New York State Department of Transportation Region 2 Region 9 207 Genesee Street 44 Hawley Street Utica, New York 13501 Binghamton, New York 13901 Broome County Chenango County 47 Thomas Road 79 Rexford Street Binghamton, New York 13901 Norwich, New York 13815 Madison County Oneida County 139 North Court Street 321 Main Street Wampsville, New York 13163 Utica, NY 13501 Route 12 Task Force: Representatives of: Chenango County Oneida County Broome County Madison County Town of New Hartford

Prepared By:

Barton & Loguidice, P.C. Wilbur Smith Associates 290 Elwood Davis Road P.O. Box 92 Box 3107 Columbia, South Carolina 29202 Syracuse, New York 13220


PHASE II -3-

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Phase II Objectives

2 EXISTING CONDITIONS

2.1 Analysis of Corridor Community Land Use 2.2 Analysis of Corridor – Base Maps 2.3 Traffic Data and Analysis 2.4 Analysis of Phase I Data 2.5 Endangered and Threatened Species Inquiry 2.6 Origin-Destination Analysis 2.7 NY-12 Function

3 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

3.1 Public Meeting Schedule & Locations 3.2 Website 3.3 Distributed Materials 3.4 Comments Received

4 PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION

4.1 Problem Identification

5 ALTERNATIVES

5.1 Evaluation Criteria 5.2 Decision-Making Matrix 5.3 Economic Analysis 5.4 Preliminary Alternatives Considered

6 RECOMMENDATIONS APPENDICES – (NOT INCLUDED IN PRELIMINARY DRAFT)

TRAFFIC DATA MAPS PHASE 1 REPORT

NYS ROUTE 12 CORRIDOR STUDY– PRELIMINARY DRAFT SEPTEMBER 2007

PHASE II -4-

INTRODUCTION


PHASE II -5-

1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Phase II Objectives

New York State Route 12 is a primary transportation corridor serving the Binghamton, Norwich, and Utica communities. With direct access to Interstate highways in both the Binghamton and Utica areas, this route has experienced a significant growth in traffic over the years, and as such, also experiences the transportation problems that coincide with that growth. The growth along the corridor has resulted in an increase in heavy vehicles, turning movements, pedestrian activity, on-street parking accommodations, and traffic signals. Additional information regarding the transportation problems can be found in Section 4.1 Problem Identification.

This Phase II Study will expand upon the Phase I Report (attached in the Appendices) by exploring the functionality of the regional of highway network. Potential macro-scale improvements will be evaluated in numerous aspects, with a particular emphasis on the following:

• Existing corridor conditions • Public input and comments • Regional-network level improvements to the corridor • Economic Impacts

The conventional approach to corridor study analysis focuses on the benefits of the highway improvements to its users, in terms of changes in travel time, safety, or operating costs. These impacts can be quantified in monetary terms, and compared to the project’s implementation costs to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the project as a public sector investment. A wider-ranging approach, enabled by recent advances in economic forecasting and modeling techniques, considers not only the direct benefits of the highway on its users, but also the broader impacts on the regional economy. Economic benefits may be defined as positive


PHASE II -6-

impacts to the area such as the generation of additional jobs, business sales, or disposable income. The most common and recognized measure of economic benefit is changes to disposable income, which reflects the change in wage income earned in the region. These benefits can be compared to economic costs, which represent the outflow of disposable income. See Section 5.3 for included economic analyses.

1.2 Description of Study Area

NYS Route 12 begins at US Route 11 in Broome County and continues north to the intersection of NYS Route 37 in St. Lawrence County. The focus area of this study includes the area from US Route 11 in the Town of Chenango, Broome County through the Towns of Greene, Oxford, Norwich, North Norwich, and Sherburne in Chenango County; Hamilton and Brookfield in Madison County; and Sangerfield, Marshall, Paris, and New Hartford in Oneida County; and ends at the NYS Thruway (I-90) in the City of Utica, a total of approximately 84 miles.

The Regional Network studied includes the above-described NY-12 corridor, Interstates I-81, I-88, and I-90 between Binghamton, Syracuse, and Utica; as well as NY Routes 20, 12B, 8, 320, 23, and 79, as shown in the following graphic:


PHASE II -7-


PHASE II -8-

EXISTING CONDITIONS


PHASE II -9-

2 EXISTING CONDITIONS 2.1 Analysis of Corridor - Community Land Use

From a Regional perspective, land use along the NY-12 corridor is mainly comprised of large undeveloped forest and agricultural tracts. Low intensity residential communities dot the corridor, with an occasional industrial and urban areas intermixed. Refer to Appendix B for GIS-based maps showing exiting land use. Each municipality along the NY-12 corridor was contacted and inquired regarding land use regulations. The following table summarizes the data received:

Zoning

Ordinance Comprehensive

Plan Flood

Program Subdivision Regulations

Site Plan Review

Broome County Chenango x Barker x Chenango County (T) Oxford x x x (T) North Norwich x x x (T) Norwich x x x (T) Preston x (T) Sherburne x x x (T) Greene x x x x (V) Oxford x x x (V) Greene x x x (V) Sherburne x City of Norwich x x x x Madison County (T) Hamilton x x x (T) Brookfield x Oneida County


PHASE II -10-

2.2 Analysis of Corridor – Base Maps

The Phase 1 Report focused on the NY-12 corridor and the functionality along the State Route. This Phase 2 report focuses on the Regional Network.

During the Phase 2 analysis, the electronic GIS project base map developed during Phase 1 has been expanded to include data collected for the Regional Network. The revised data set includes federal and state wetlands, historic and significant properties, environmental hazard areas, and large tracts of private and agricultural lands. Population data, average commuting distances, and household income based on municipality are included in the GIS data set with various maps attached as Appendix B.

2.3 Traffic Data and Analysis

A. Regional Network Traffic Volumes The Regional Network, as described in Section 1.2, includes Interstates I-81, I-88, and I-90 between Binghamton, Syracuse, and Utica; as well as numerous interconnecting NY State Routes. A summary of available tabulated traffic volume data is included in the following tables:

Interstate 81 Section 2006 2010 2020 Trucks

AADT AADT AADT Binghamton to Cortland 24200 25685 29808 9%

Cortland to Tully 32400 34388 39909 15%

Tully to Nedrow (I-481) 40400 42879 49763 9%

Nedrow (I-481) to I-90 76000 80664 93613 9%


PHASE II -11-

Interstate 90 Section 2006 2010 2020 Trucks

AADT AADT AADT I-81 to I-481 37300 39589 45944 18%

I-481 to Utica 32800 34813 40402 22%

NYS-8 Section 2006 2010 2020 Trucks

AADT AADT AADT South New Berlin (South of RT 23) 1530 1624 1885 19%

South New Berlin (North of RT 23) 2410 2558 2969 12%

Route-23 Section 2006 2010 2020 Trucks

AADT AADT AADT Norwich (East of NY-12) 1700 1804 2094 4%

Norwich (West of NY-12) 4490 4766 5531 6%

NY-12 (Supplemental) Section 2006 2010 2020 Trucks

AADT AADT AADT South of Greene 5950 6315 7329 10%

North of Greene 5430 5763 6688 12%

South of Norwich 7670 8141 9448 8%

North of Norwich 7520 7981 9263 12%

South of NY-12B 6800 7217 8376 8%

North of NY-12B 2970 3152 3658 8%

In addition to the Traffic Volume Report data, the following supplemental traffic data and turning movements were collected for intersecting roads along the NY-12 corridor:


PHASE II -12-

West of NY-12 East of NY-12 Directional Flow Directional Flow

AADT Peak Hour

Eastbound AM(PM)

Westbound AM(PM) AADT

Peak Hour

Eastbound AM(PM)

Westbound AM(PM)

Broome County NYS 12A NA NA NA NA 12507 1376 550(826) 826(550) CR 96 NA NA NA NA 1738 191 76(115) 115(76) CR 128 1400 154 92(62) 62(92) NA NA NA NA NYS 79 1546 170 102(67) 67(102) 1350 149 60(89) 89(60)

Chenango County CR 1 / Cloverdale Rd. NA NA 2(17) 8(6) NA NA NA NA CR 2 / Genegantslet Rd. NA NA 38(58) 26(38) NA NA NA NA NYS 206 2998 330 198(132) 132(198) NA NA NA NA NYS 206 / 41 NA NA NA NA 6149 676 403(273) 273(403) NYS 41 1320 145 87(58) 58(87) NA NA NA NA CR 32C / Bridge St. NA NA NA NA NA NA 16(17) 13(14) CR 3 NA NA 40(20) 7(35) NA NA NA NA NYS 220 1422 156 94(62) 62(94) 3431 377 151(226) 226(151) CR 4 / Georgetown Rd. 556 23(38) 16(18) NA NA NA NA CR 32B NA NA NA NA NA NA 31(72) 76(93) Hail St. NA NA NA NA NA NA 99(117) 208(275) Main St. 0 226(240) 107(168) 0 120(220) 210(206) NYS 23 4173 459 276(183) 183(276) 4781 526 210(316) 316(210) NYS 320 NA NA NA NA 5233 576 230(346) 346(230) CR 23 NA NA 81(62) 37(73) NA NA NA NA CR 32 NA NA NA NA NA NA 100(124) 78(130) NYS 80 1669 184 110(74) 74(110) 3225 355 142(213) 213(142) NYS 12B 5872 646 388(258) 258(388) NA NA NA NA CR 24 / Shaker Brook Rd. NA NA NA NA NA NA 14(62) 64(41)

Oneida County U.S. 20 3295 362 217(145) 145(217) 3305 364 146(218) 218(146) Sanger Hill Rd. 0 0 NYS 315 1684 185 111(74) 74(111) NA NA NA NA CR 13 / Kellogg St. 0 0 Paris Rd. NA NA NA NA 0


PHASE II -13-

B. Regional Network Level-of-Service

Existing mainline level of service (LOS) has been determined for each of the Regional Network segments. The following LOS information has been added to the electronic GIS data set.

Interstate 81 Section to Section vph LOS vph LOS

2006 2006 2026 2026 Exit 6S to Exit 6N 1437 B 1603 B

Exit 6N to Exit 7 1401 B 1563 B

Exit 7 to Exit 8S 1501 B 1675 C

Exit 8S to Exit 8N 1164 B 1299 B

Exit 8N to Cortland Co Line 1077 B 1202 B

Cortland Co Line to NYS-221 1102 B 1229 B

NYS-221 to NYS 11 & 41 1244 B 1389 B

NYS 11 & 41 to NYS 13 1146 B 1279 B

NYS 13 to NYS 11 1479 B 1647 B

NYS 11 to NYS 281 1448 B 1615 B

NYS 281 to NYS 80 1716 B 1915 C

NYS 80 to NYS 11 1802 B 2011 C

NYS 11 to I-481 2140 C 2388 C

I-481 to Brighton Ave 2416 B 2696 B

Brighton Ave to Colvin Street 2844 B 3174 C

Colvin Street to E. Adams St. 4499 D 5020 D

E. Adams St. to I-690 4934 F 5506 F

I-690 to NYS-370 5524 E 6164 F

NYS-370 to 7th North St. 4523 D 5047 D

7th North St to I-90 4531 D 5034 D


PHASE II -14-


2006 2006 2026 2026 Exit 1 (I-481) to Exit 2 1207 B 2209 C

Exit 2 to Exit 3 1979 C 2209 C

Exit 3 to Exit 4 (I-690) 3501 E 3907 F

Exit 4 (I-690) to Exit 5 2799 D 3124 D

Exit 5 to Exit 6 (I-90) 2008 C 2240 C


2006 2006 2026 2026 Exit 31 (Utica) to Exit 32 2630 C 2935 D

Exit 32 to Exit 33 3011 D 3360 D

Exit 33 to Exit 34 3666 E 4092 F

Exit 34 to Exit 34A (I-481) 4058 F 4528 F


2006 2006 2026 2026 NYS-88 to RT. 7 Overlap 980 B 1094 B

RTE 7 Overlap to NY-12A 1577 C 1760 C

NY-12A to RT. 369 1299 B 1450 B

RT. 369 to RT. 7 Overlap 867 A 967 A

RT. 7 Overlap to RT. 992 P 798 A 891 A

RT. 992 P to RT. 79 708 A 790 A

RT. 79 to RT. 206 713 A 795 A

RT. 206 to Del/Chen Co. Line 692 A 772 A

Del/Chen Co. Line to NYS-8 645 A 720 A


PHASE II -15-

NYS-8 Section to Section vph LOS vph LOS

2006 2006 2026 2026 I-88 to CR-35 661 C 737 C

CR-35 to CR-51 342 B 382 B

CR-51 to RT. 23 171 B 191 B

RT. 23 to RT. 80 (start) 245 B 274 B

RT. 80 (start) to RT. 80 (end) 386 C 431 C

RT. 80 (end) to CR-96 169 B 189 B

CR-96 to On/Mad Co Line 299 C 333 C

On/Mad Co Line to CR-7 450 C 502 C

CR-7 to Town of Paris 607 C 678 C

Town of Paris to Oneida Street 650 C 726 C

Oneida Street to Holman City Rd 676 C 754 C

Holman City Rd to CR-9 748 C 835 C

CR-9 to Valley View 1068 D 1192 D


2006 2006 2026 2026 NY-12 to NYS-8 781 D 872 D


PHASE II -16-

NY-12B Section to Section vph LOS vph LOS

2006 2006 2026 2026 NY-12 to Town Rd 34 581 C 648 C

Town Rd 34 to Mad/Chn Co Line 473 C 528 C

Mad/Chn Co Line to S Ham Lane 365 C 407 C

S Ham Lane to CR-87 641 E 715 E

CR-87 to NYS-46 719 E 803 E

NYS-46 to NYS-20/26 158 B 176 B

20 Overlap to 20 Overlap 514 C 573 C

20 Overlap to NYS-315 315 C 352 C

NYS-315 to NYS-233 597 C 666 C

NYS-233 to CR-16 625 C 697 D

CR-16 to NYS-412 728 D 812 D

NYS-412 to 5B Overlap 1294 D 1444 E

5B Overlap to 5B Overlap 1546 E 1725 E

5B Overlap to NYS-5 848 D 946 D


2006 2006 2026 2026 I-81 to NYS-11 733 E 818 E

NYS-11 to Apula Road 384 E 420 E

Apula Road to NYS-91 265 E 296 E

NYS-91 to NYS-92 217 C 242 C

NYS-92 to NYS-13 Olap 952 D 1062 D

NYS-13 Olap to NYS-13 Olap 1110 E 1238 E

NYS-13 Olap to Carriage Line 605 A 675 A

Carriage Line to CR-67 553 A 617 A

CR-67 to Cambridge Ave 314 A 350 A

Cambridge Ave to CR-45 422 A 470 A

CR-45 to 46 Overlap 292 A 326 A

46 Overlap to 46 Overlap 794 D 886 D

46 Overlap to 26 Overlap 320 B 357 B

26 Overlap to 12B Overlap 439 C 490 C

12B Overlap to 12B Overlap 313 A 350 A


PHASE II -17-

12B Overlap to NYS-8 196 A 219 A

NY-12 (NY-12A to NYS-206) Section to Section vph LOS vph LOS

2006 2006 2026 2026 NY-12A to CR-96 1258 D 1404 E

CR-96 to NYS-79 1135 D 1267 D

NYS-79 to BRM/CHN Line 907 D 1012 D

BRM/CHN Line to NYS-206 791 C 883 C

Front Street to SOUTH 1163 D 1297 D

NY-12 (NYS-206 to City of Norwich) Section to Section vph LOS vph LOS

2006 2006 2026 2026 NYS-206 to CR-3A 568 E 634 E

CR-3A to CR-3 460 C 513 C

CR-3 to NYS-220 518 E 578 E

NYS-220 to CR-4 675 C 753 C

CR-4 to Wal-Mart Ent 629 C 702 C

Wal-Mart Ent to (C) Norwich 1250 E 1396 E

NY-12 (City of Norwich) Section to Section vph LOS vph LOS

2006 2006 2026 2026 City Line to City Line 1503 E 1678 E

NY-12 (Norwich to NY-12B) Section to Section vph LOS vph LOS

2006 2006 2026 2026 City Line to NYS-320 1568 E 1750 E

NYS-320 to Nor. Town Line 862 C 962 C

Nor. Town Line to NYS-80 745 C 832 C

NYS-80 to NY-12B 1004 E 1120 E


PHASE II -18-

NY-12 (NY-12B to NYS-5) Section to Section vph LOS vph LOS

2006 2006 2026 2026 NY-12B to Mad/Chn Co Line 401 C 447 C

Mad/Chn Co Line to CR-74 156 B 174 B

CR-74 to On/Mad Co Line 272 B 304 B

On/Mad Co Line to NYS-20 352 B 393 B

NYS-20 to CR-7 504 E 562 E

CR-7 to Shanley Road 512 C 571 C

Shanley Road to CR-13 423 C 473 C

CR-13 to NYS-921E 585 C 653 C

NYS-921E to NYS-5 2091 E 2334 E

NY-12 (NYS-5 to I-90) Section to Section vph LOS vph LOS

2006 2006 2026 2026 NYS-5 to I-90 3397 B 3791 B

The following map summarizes the LOS information:


PHASE II -19-

C. Regional Network Speeds and Delay

C(D) D(D)

E(F) F(F) C(C)

F(F) D(D) B(C) B(B)

C(C)

B(C)

E(C)

E(E)

E(E)

B(C)

B(C)

B(B)

B(B)

B(B)

B(B)

B(B)

B(B)

B(B)

B(C) B(B)

B(B)

D(D) E(F)

C(C) B(C)

D(D) E(E)

B(B)

C(C) D(D)

C(C) C(C) C(C)

C(C) A(A)

E(E)

C(C) C(C) C(C)

D(E) D(D) C(D) C(C)

C(C)

B(B)

B(B)

E(E)

E(E)

A(A)

C(C)

B(B)

D(B)

A(A)

A(A)

A(A) A(A)

E(E) D(D)

C(C)

C(B)

B(B)

C(C)

D(D)

C(C) B(B)

C(C) C(C) E(E)

C(C)

C(C)

B(B)

C(C)

D(E) B(B)

A(A)

A(A)

A(A) A(A)

A(A) A(A)

C(C)

B(B)

B(B)

C(C)

C(C)

E(E)

C(C)

D(D) D(D)

C(C)

E(E)

C(C) E(E)

B(B)


PHASE II -20-

Travel speed and delay estimates have been developed for the Regional Highway Network, identifying areas of significant delay. A drive thru method was used along each segment of the Regional Network to acquire representative speeds, time of travel and delay. A speed study was performed for each segment of Regional Highway Network. A constant speed, equivalent to the posted speed limits, was maintained where conflicts did not exist. For all runs, the weather was mostly sunny and the road surfaces were dry. As shown in the following table, the average drive time from Chenango Bridge to Utica along NY-12 is approximately 1 hour and 49 minutes. Each of the alternative Regional Network routes includes longer travel times, as summarized in the table below:

Route Segments Traveled

Total Travel Time

(h:m:s)

Difference (h:m:s)

SR 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 1:49:39 0:00:00 I-88 to SR 8 14 15 6 1:51:35 0:01:56 I-81 to I-481 to I-90 13 7 8 1:53:23 0:03:44 SR 12 to SR 12b to SR12 1 2 3 4 10 6 1:56:23 0:06:44 SR 12 to SR 23 to SR 8 to SR 12 1 2 3 12 15 6 1:55:35 0:05:56 I-81 to SR 20 to SR 12 13 9 5 6 2:06:08 0:16:29

The following map shows the network segments:


PHASE II -21-

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15


PHASE II -22-

The following tables summarize the travel time data for each segment (full travel data is available in the Appendices):

Segment 1 : NY-12 (from NYS-11 to NYS 206)

Segment * Posted Speed

Length (miles)

Travel Time (minutes: seconds)

Avg. Speed (mph)

1 45 mph 14.2 17:35 48 mph

* General Posted Speed (may vary in municipal jurisdictions) Factors that increase delay and congestion for this segment include:

• Turning traffic onto side roads without designated turning lanes • Heavy vehicles entering corridor • Traffic signals • School bus traffic

Segment 2 : NY-12 (from NYS-206 to City of Norwich)

Segment Posted Speed

Length (miles)


Avg. Speed (mph)

2 55 mph 20.2 25:17 47 mph

Factors that increase delay and congestion for this segment include:

• Traffic signals • School bus traffic


PHASE II -23-

Segment 3 : NY-12 (City of Norwich)


Length (miles)


Avg. Speed (mph)

3 30 mph 1.8 5:37 19 mph


• Heavy turning movements • Urban character • Traffic signals • School bus traffic • Pedestrians • Parking Movements

Segment 4 : NY-12 (City of Norwich to NY-12B)


Length (miles)


Avg. Speed (mph)

4 30-55 mph 11.5 15:13 45 mph


• Turning movements • Heavy Vehicles


PHASE II -24-

Segment 5 : NY-12 (NY-12B to NYS-5)


Length (miles)


Avg. Speed (mph)

5 55 mph 31.4 38:20 49 mph


• Turning movements • Heavy Vehicles • Roadway Geometry

Segment 6 : NY-12 (NYS-5 to I-90)


Length (miles)


Avg. Speed (mph)

6 35-55 mph 5.4 7:37 42 mph


• Turning movements • Urban character • Traffic signals • School bus traffic


PHASE II -25-

Segment 7 : I-481 (I-81 to I-90)


Length (miles)


Avg. Speed (mph)

7 65 mph 9.4 8:47 64 mph


• Merging movements / Interchanges Segment 8 : I-90 (Utica to I-481)


Length (miles)


Avg. Speed (mph)

8 65 mph 43.8 42:10 62 mph


• Merging movements / Interchanges • Heavy Truck volumes


PHASE II -26-

Segment 9 : NYS-20 (NY-8 to I-81)


Length (miles)


Avg. Speed (mph)

9 55 mph 40.2 46:45 52 mph



Segment 10 : NY-12B (NY-12 to NY-5)


Length (miles)


Avg. Speed (mph)

10 45 mph 35.4 45:04 47 mph


• Heavy Vehicles • Roadway Geometry


PHASE II -27-

Segment 11 : NY-12B (NY-12 to NY-20)


Length (miles)


Avg. Speed (mph)

11 45 mph 17.2 21:54 47 mph



Segment 12 : NYS-23 (NY-12 to NY-8)


Length (miles)


Avg. Speed (mph)

12 45 mph 8.3 11:15 44 mph


• Heavy Vehicles • Roadway Geometry


PHASE II -28-

Segment 13 : I-81 (I-88 to I-90)


Length (miles)


Avg. Speed (mph)

13 65 mph 74.0 70:10 63 mph


• Heavy Vehicles • Vertical Grades • Merging Movements / Interchanges

Segment 14 : I-88 (I-81 to NYS-8)


Length (miles)


Avg. Speed (mph)

14 55 mph 30.0 31:00 58 mph


• Heavy Vehicles Segment 15 : NYS-20 (NY-8 to I-81)


Length (miles)


Avg. Speed (mph)

15 45 mph 58.2 72:58 48 mph




PHASE II -29-

2.4 Analysis of Phase 1 Data

SECTION NOT COMPLETE – TO BE UPDATED BASED ON TASK

FORCE “REPORT CARD” The following projects were recommended based on the Phase 1 corridor report. Following Task-Force concurrence, each should be evaluated on an economic benefit basis, using the evaluation matrix developed for the Regional Network. A weighted scoring mechanism will determine and screen the improvements to identify the most beneficial project to progress first. Priority 1

• NYS Route 79 (turning lanes) $ 370,000 • Brotzman Rd to River Rd (turning lanes) $ 410,000 (2006) • Canal St to NYS Route 220 (turning lanes) $ 450,000 • Village of Waterville (turning lanes) $ 510,000 (2005) • NYS Route 206 to NYS Route 41(turning lanes) $ 590,000 (2005) • Knapp Hill Rd to Willard Rd (alignment) $ 1,070,000 • Village of Sherburne (turning lanes $ 1,520,000 • Lower Ravine Rd to City of Norwich (alignment) $ 1,530,000 • US Rt 20 Sangerfield (intersection, widening) $ 8,140,000

Priority 2

• Oak Hill Rd (climbing lanes) $ 330,000 • Wilson Rd to North Norwich (alignment) $ 1,070,000 (2002) • Stockwell (alignment) $ 1,070,000 • Daytonville (alignment) $ 1,070,000 (2002) • Burmaster Rd (alignment) $ 1,070,000 • Clarey Rd (alignment) $ 1,070,000 • Brisben to Hill Rd (alignment) $ 1,210,000


PHASE II -30-

• Laurel Rd to South Chenango St Ext (pavement)$ 1,500,000 • Foster Hill Rd (alignment) $ 1,520,000 • Bunt Rd to Hogsback Rd (alignment) $ 1,520,000

Priority 3

• Brookfield (turning lane) $ 90,000 • Woods Corners/NYS Route 320 (turning lanes) $ 310,000 • Chenango County Route 4 (turning lanes) $ 320,000 • Chenango County Route 32B(turning lanes) $ 320,000 • Raymond Corporation Entrance (turning lanes) $ 370,000 • City of Norwich (intersection) $ 410,000 • Broome Co Hwy Dept Entrance (turning lanes) $ 405,000 • Solid Waste Facility Entrance (turning lanes) $ 1,130,000 • NYS Route 41 to County Route 3A (shoulders) $ 2,010,000 • Paris Rd to NYS Route 5 (climbing lanes) $ 4,200,000 • US Route 11 to NYS Route 12A (2002) • NYS Route 12B to Madison County Line (2002) • Hamlet of Paris (2002) • NYS Route 5 to I-90

2.5 Endangered and Threatened Species Inquiry

Contacts have been made to determine the presence of specific endangered and threatened species and the availability of potentially suitable habitat within/or along the NY-12 corridor. The information obtained has been added to the electronic GIS data set, and maps are included in the Appendices.


PHASE II -31-

2.6 Origin-Destination Analysis

A volumetric method to estimate the existing NY-12 travel demands was performed for this study, in order to derive the potential economic impacts from different alternatives. For each progressed alternative, capacities and relative connectivity of the NY-12 network, changes in vehicle hours and miles under different scenarios will be estimated. The travel demand estimation model will be contained in an Origin Destination Matrix. This technique identifies the key sources of travel demand based on patterns in observed traffic counts. Traffic counts for NY-12 and the Regional network will be used to pinpoint those areas expected to produce and attract corridor traffic as reflected in the counts. These findings will be checked against census block level data to verify major sources of traffic affecting the Route 12 system. The result will be a set of trip productions and attractions for traffic using NY-12 and its supporting roadways. These trips will be re-assigned to different facilities and alignments associated with NY-12 alternatives to demonstrate changes (savings or losses) in vehicle mileages and times under different scenarios. These travel time and distance savings will then form the basis for transportation efficiency impacts, to be analyzed in Section 5. Further documented in the Appendices, the Origin-Destination (OD) Matrix along the NY-12 corridor utilizes the following nodes for reference:


PHASE II -32-

Node # Node Name Side Node # Node Name Side 1 Rt 12 Binghamton 18 NBT Bank East 2 NYS 12A East 19 Hail St. East 3 CR 96 East 20 E. Main East 4 CR 128 West 21 W. Main West 5 NYS 79 West 22 County Bldg. West 6 CR 1 West 23 Hospital East 7 CR 2 West 24 NYS 23 West 8 Raymond Corp East 25 NYS 23 East 9 NYS 206 West 26 NYS 320 East 10 NYS 206/41 East 27 CR 23 West 11 NYS 41 West 28 CR 32 East 12 CR 32 East 29 NYS 80 West 13 CR 3 West 30 NYS 80 East 14 NYS 220 West 31 NYS 12B West 15 NYS 220 East 32 Sherburne Schools East 16 CR 4 West 33 CR 24 East 17 CR 32B East 34 Rt 12 Mad Co. Line

Additional O/D analysis will be provided in the Final Report… The following chart summarizes the baseline volumetric matrix:


PHASE II -33-


PHASE II -34-

2.7 NY-12 Function

New York State Route 12 is a primary transportation corridor serving the Binghamton, Norwich, and Utica communities. With direct access to Interstate highways in both the Binghamton and Utica areas, this route has experienced a significant growth in traffic over the years, and as such, also experiences the transportation problems that coincide with that growth. NYS Route 12 begins at US Route 11 in Broome County and continues north to the intersection of NYS Route 37 in St. Lawrence County. The focus area of this study includes the area from US Route 11 in the Town of Chenango, Broome County through the Towns of Greene, Oxford, Norwich, North Norwich, and Sherburne in Chenango County; Hamilton and Brookfield in Madison County; and Sangerfield, Marshall, Paris, and New Hartford in Oneida County; and ends at the NYS Thruway (I-90) in the City of Utica, a total of approximately 84 miles. The corridor is generally rural and agricultural, with pockets of development through the urban areas in Binghamton, Greene, Oxford, Norwich, Sherburne, Waterville, and Utica. NY-12 originally extended south into downtown Binghamton by running concurrent with US 11. Since the original construction, bypasses have been built around Greene, N. Norwich, Barneveld, and Paris. Expressway sections in the Utica area were built in the late 1960's and early 1970's. Prior to that, NY 12 followed Genesee St. through downtown Utica, and then tracked north along Trenton Rd. (Oneida CR 91) before returning to its present course just south of Mapledale Road.


PHASE II -35-

NY-12 Description:

• Southern Terminus: US 11, Chenango Bridge • Northern Terminus: NY 37, Morristown • Full Length: 222.47 miles (358.18 km) • Counties:

o Broome o Chenango o Madison o Oneida

o Lewis o Jefferson o St. Lawrence

• Cities: o Norwich o Utica

o Watertown

• Villages: o Oxford o Sherburne o Waterville o New Hartford o Boonville o Port Leyden

o Lyons Falls o Lowville o Copenhagen o Clayton o Alexandria Bay

• Road Names: o Front St. o Canal St. o Broad St. o Main St. o Utica Rd. o Faulkner Rd. o Sanger Ave. o Stafford Ave. o New Paris Rd. o Genesee St.

o Erwin Pkwy. o Dayan St. o Van Allen Rd. o Gifford St. o State St. o Court St. o Leray St. o Bradley St. o James St.


PHASE II -36-

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT


PHASE II -37-

3 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 3.1 Public meeting Schedule & Locations

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT TO BE PERFORMED IN EARLY 2007 Through a series of Public Involvement activates, the study will develop

and implement a Public Participation Plan that will provide opportunities

to private citizens, elected officials, affected agencies, the media, and

interested stakeholders to advance ideas, participate in the study’s

development and to offer suggestions related to the outcome of the study.

Due to the length of the study area, Public Informational Meetings will be

held at dispersed locations along the NY-12 corridor to provide the

opportunity for public comment. Meetings will be held to identify

problems, identify local goals, project objectives and to propose potential

alternatives. A final meeting is to be held at a midpoint location to review

and discuss projects recommended for further development.

3.2 Website

https://www.nysdot.gov/portal/page/portal/regional-offices/region9/projects/route12-corridor The website developed during Phase 1 will be augmented to include the

results of Phase 2, when finalized. The website will serve to promote the

NY-12 Project, and will be hosted by the New York State Department of

Transportation. The website shall be an informative site that residents,

government leaders and other concerned citizens can navigate through.

The website shall have information on the overall project and its current

status.


PHASE II -38-

3.3 Distributed Materials

Public Involvement brochures and materials will be included here.

3.4 Comments Received

Public comments and responses will be included here.


PHASE II -39-

PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION


PHASE II -40-

4 PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION 4.1 Problem Identification

The overwhelming factor preventing NY-12 from being the corridor of choice from Binghamton to Utica is delay, and the accompanying perceived driver frustration. As shown in Section 2, travel times along NY-12 between the two major urban areas are actually lower than the travel times along the Regional Network, and yet the interstate routes are much preferred by much of the traveling public. There are several sources of delay along the NY-12 corridor. Urbanized areas, seen in the Chenango Bridge and Norwich sections, introduce delay with heavy turning movements, pedestrian activity, on-street parking accommodations, and traffic signals. The suburban and rural areas of the corridor create delay by including agricultural vehicles, turning movements into driveways, and limited passing opportunities. The results of discussions with daily commuters along the corridor affirm these problems. Most commuters, especially those traveling between the Greene and Sherburne areas, become frustrated with the bus, truck, plow, and Norwich delays – opting instead for an alternate route. In addition, improving the number and functionality of access points to the adjacent I-81 and I-88 systems may have a large impact on the volumes of traffic choosing the NY-12 corridor. Especially on the southern end of the corridor, access to the Finger-Lakes and Southern Tier portions of New York State can prove difficult from the NY-12 corridor. These impacts will be further studied in Section 5, and analyzed on an economic impact basis as the study progresses.


PHASE II -41-

ALTERNATIVES


PHASE II -42-

5 ALTERNATIVES 5.1 Evaluation Criteria

The evaluation criteria need to be developed and adopted by the task

force following the public input phase; the following discussion serves as

the initial discoveries, and will be developed further along in the process.

Primary Project Criteria

Safety

Operating Speeds and Delay

Constructability

System Continuity / Security

Secondary Project Criteria

Community Support

Regional Economic Development

Environmental Factors

R/W Requirements

Construction Costs

The development of Evaluation Criteria will be formulated with input

obtained from the Public Participation phase of the study and from

Department goals & objectives. The following section may serve as an

evaluation apparatus.

5.2 Decision-Making Matrix

Following the finalization of the evaluation criteria, a Decision-Making

Matrix will be developed that arrays each alternative against the

evaluation criteria. The results will show the benefits, impacts, and costs

associated with each alternative.


PHASE II -43-

Following the Public Input Phases and Task Force concurrence

regarding feasible alternatives, a detailed predictive analysis will be

performed for the corridor forecasting economic and transportation,

including changes in traffic flows, travel time, accidents, and vehicle

operating costs; and economic development impacts, including changes in

employment, business sales, business costs, and disposable income.

The NY-12 Corridor Study will generate numerous alternative, which will

range in scale from individual intersection improvements to municipal by-

passes and possibly even interstate concepts. In order to insure a

thorough and consistent analysis process, the Study Team will use the

performance measures and evaluation criteria tied to the goals and

objectives of the project to screen the alternatives. The following Table

presents the performance measures as they relate to the goals and

objectives.


PHASE II -44-

Goal Objective Performance Measures

Improve overall travel time through the corridor

• Level of Service • Delay • Travel speed • Travel time

Mobility & Reliability

Improve System Reliability • Number of restrictions • Pavement condition • Incident clearance time

Reduce the cost per mile for passenger and freight

• Cost per mile • Vehicle operating costs • Travel time • Delay

Enhance economic sustainability

• Access to adjacent cities • Travel time between major destinations • Access to regional economic centers

Economic Benefits

Increase economic benefit • Market conditions Transportation projects have a positive effect on the environment

• Number and type of improvements impacting natural environment • Number and type of improvements impacting built/human environment

Environmental and Cultural

Transportation system development is coordinated with land use development

• Number of cooperative land use and transportation plans • Number of projects that employ Context Sensitive Solutions

Reduce the number and severity of vehicular, pedestrian or bicycle crashes in the Study Area

• Accident rate • Reduction in conflict points • Number of high accident locations modified

Safety

Correct substandard roadway conditions

• Roadway Geometry • Pavement Widths • Sight Restrictions

Security

Provide reasonable redundancy of transportation systems

• Number of redundant access points (e.g. route diversions) • Full Shoulders


PHASE II -45-

5.3 Economic Analysis To be performed by WSA following public-input and task force consensus

on problems and feasible alternatives.

The economic development analyses will focus on the following types of

economic impacts:

Direct Economic Benefits – Existing businesses may experience a

reduction in production costs associated with the highway user benefits.

This reduction in costs would improve the competitive position of these

firms, making them better able to expand. In addition, a transportation

investment also may make a region more attractive to business (or

tourists) by improving access to suppliers, customer markets, labor

markets, or inter-modal transportation facilities.

Secondary Economic Benefits – The direct impacts to businesses may

have secondary impacts. Some businesses may experience increased

intermediate purchases by the direct beneficiaries of the investment.

A public investment in a major highway (or other transportation) project

is considered “economically feasible” if the economy is better off with the

investment than without it. Without question the investment will be a

significant asset to the corridor region. But the key issue is overall

efficiency, and whether the highway investment will create sufficient

efficiencies and opportunities so as to induce suitable economic

productivity and/or economic development as to make the transportation

investment feasible.

A transportation investment will contribute to economic development if it

significantly reduces travel costs, diverts large numbers of travelers,

dramatically improves access to emerging industrial/commercial centers,

or if it dramatically changes traveler’s perceptions of the area.


PHASE II -46-

5.4 Preliminary Alternatives Considered A. Improved I-88 Access:

Existing Conditions: Access to Route 12 from Interstate 88 is currently accomplished using NY-12A. Impediments along this route include delays at the various signalized intersections. Truck turning movements can be heavy, with many commercial vehicles using NY-12A as a connector to I-81 and points north. Passenger vehicle access to interstate 81 is also accomplished using NY-12A and US-11, with a significant delay at the US-11 / NY-12 intersection. The following photograph depicts the existing NY-12 and NY-12A Intersection:


PHASE II -47-

Currently, vehicles going to I-81 north from I-88 can either use the I-88 and I-81 interchange at Exit 1, or use Exit 2 and travel the NY-12A/NY-12 corridor. The travel time for each method is approximately four (4) minutes, with the potential for additional delays through the NY-12 signalized intersections. In the current configuration, there is no travel time benefit to using the NY-12 corridor as an access point to I-81 northbound. Future Conditions: Some benefit to commercial traffic may be gained by establishing a more direct connection between I-88 and NY-12, potentially utilizing the existing Interstate footprint in the Port Crane Area.


PHASE II -48-

Potential Connection Routes

Travel Time / LOS Improvements: This potential Route may reduce delays through the urbanized area, and draw traffic directly from the I-81 / I-88 interchange to the south instead of utilizing the local street system. The average travel speed along this segment of NY-12 is approximately 48 mph, which is generally acceptable. The prime benefit of an improved I-88 connection may be minimally enhanced commercial vehicle access to the NY-12 corridor, by reducing the amount of urban intersections which must be navigated by one.


PHASE II -49-

Potential impacts to the neighborhoods should be weighed against any potential savings in delay. Economic Benefits: To be determined by WSA during the final economic analysis.

Approximate Project Costs: The order-of-magnitude project cost would be in the $5 - $8 million range.


PHASE II -50-

B. Norwich Alternate Route

Existing Conditions: One of the most prominent sources of delay in the corridor is the urban section within the City of Norwich. With an existing Level-of-Service (LOS) grade of “E”, and an average travel speed of 19 mph, travel through the urbanized portion of Norwich is a bane to both commercial vehicles and commuter travelers. It may prove advantageous to consider an alternate commercial through route which by-passes the major area of delay. The most probable option would bypass Norwich to the east, perhaps following CR-32B and CR-32, returning at a point north of North Norwich.


PHASE II -51-

Future Conditions: Considerable public input should be solicited when considering such a bypass, since a reduction in traffic may impact local businesses. Best interests may be served by designating the bypass as a Truck Route only, in an attempt to preserve non-truck volumes within the central business district. Removing the through commercial vehicles and investigating potential parking improvements in the downtown area may provide significant reductions in delay, while also benefiting the pedestrian accommodations in the urban area. Of course, re-routing trucks from a State highway to a County route may require additional engineering analysis. It may also be beneficial to interconnect the traffic signals in downtown Norwich, using a wireless system. Proper coordination will allow each signal to know when traffic is approaching, and adjust the signal timing appropriately. Coordination with the City will be discussed during the upcoming Task Force meeting.


PHASE II -52-

Travel Time / LOS Improvements: Removing large vehicles and conflicting turning movements may improve the existing delay by several minutes, allowing passenger vehicles to travel at or near the posted speed limits. A future LOS approaching “C” would not be unreasonable with the proper implementation. Although the potential CR-32 alternate route and the NY-12 route are approximately the same length, congestion may be relieved during the peak business hours by removing the large vehicles from the downtown district. It should also be noted that portions of CR-32 have been recently reconstructed, and 32-B is scheduled for reconstruction in 2007. Numerous vehicle runs along both NY-12 and the potential CR-32/CR-32B truck route were timed to determine possible savings. On average, the CR-32 route saved 1 – 2 minutes during non-peak hours, and saved 3 – 4 minutes during peak times. The savings were increased due to the large amount of bus and truck traffic through downtown Norwich during peak hours. Economic Benefits: To be determined by WSA during the final economic analysis. Approximate Project Costs:

If NYSDOT would need to purchase the ROW from Chenango County, and that rehabilitation upgrades would be required along the existing CR-32 corridor, the order-of-magnitude project cost would be in the $15-20 million range.


PHASE II -53-

C. Improved NY-8 Connections

Existing Conditions: The parallel routes of NY-12 and NY-8 are currently connected near the City of Norwich by route 23 and the combination of routes 320 and 29. The route 320/29 combination conveys the National Highway System designation from NY-12 to the south and NY-8 to the north. Future Conditions: Improving the connection between the City of Norwich and the parallel NYS-8 corridor may improve travel times and take advantage of the existing Expressway sections near New Hartford.


PHASE II -54-

Travel Time / LOS Improvements: Off-peak travel times would not be reduced to a great extent, with the greater gain being based on the improved reliability of the connection. Improved sections, with the potential for wide shoulders and accommodations for turning vehicles, would improve most of the major sources of delay. Improved connections may benefit both of these parallel routes. Economic Benefits: To be determined by WSA during the final economic analysis. Approximate Project Costs: Approximately 14 miles of improvements may be required between Norwich and New Berlin, with an order-of-magnitude project cost in the $10 million range.


PHASE II -55-

D. Hamilton Connector

Existing Conditions: The Village of Hamilton and university areas are currently connected to NY-12 by state route 12-B, which runs is a nearly north-south orientation. Access to the village from the eastern and northern portions of NY-12 is limited, relying mainly on local roads. Future Conditions: Improving the connection between the Village of Hamilton and the northern portions of the NYS-12 corridor may improve travel times and enhance accessibility to the University areas.


PHASE II -56-

Travel Time / LOS Improvements: A few minutes of travel time would be saved with an arterial or connector-type facility serving the village area. Level of service would also be improved, since the existing local roads do not appear to be designed to current standards. Economic Benefits: To be determined by WSA during the final economic analysis. Approximate Project Costs: With the assumption that the ROW would need to be acquired, the order-of-magnitude project cost would be in the $8-10 million range.


PHASE II -57-

E. Interstate 81 Connector

Existing Conditions: In lieu of a revamped I-88 interconnection in the Binghamton area, an improved connection to I-81 closer Whitney Point may prove advantageous in drawing traffic from the western region to the NY-12 corridor. There are no current routes between Chenango Bridge to the south, and NYS-20 to the north, which serve the NY-12 corridor without undue delays and poor Levels-of-Service. Traffic wishing to access NY-12 from the Finger-Lakes region must either travel along numerous geometrically insufficient county and local roads, or migrate a significant distance to the south to access the Interstate connection.


PHASE II -58-

Future Conditions: An arterial-type connection to I-81 would allow commercial traffic to access the corridor while avoiding potential congestion in the urbanized areas of Chenango and Binghamton. This may also open commercial lanes between the NY-12 corridor and populated areas near Ithaca, Elmira, Corning, and points west Travel Time / LOS Improvements: An improved I-81 connection to the southern portion of the NY-12 corridor may reduce delays between Whitney Point and Chenango Bridge by as much as eight (8) minutes, in comparison to the route traveling CR-79 though the Towns of Whitney Point and Itaska, offering a significant improvement in accessibility. Properly designed, an arterial-type connector should easily function with a LOS of “C:” or better. Economic Benefits: To be determined by WSA during the final economic analysis. Approximate Project Costs: Assuming that NYSDOT would need to purchase the ROW from the Town, and that reconstruction would be required along the existing Knapp Hill Road corridor, including improvements to the intersection to NYS-11, the order-of-magnitude project cost is approximately $8 million.


PHASE II -59-

F. 3-Lane Segments with Dedicated Passing Lanes

In rural sections of the corridor, left turning movements and truck climbing speeds become the major causes of delay. In these areas, a 3-lane highway with Dedicated Passing Lanes may prove beneficial. Sometimes called a “2-lane Expressway”, this option would include frequent passing zones, along with the potential for improved driveway access. Frontage roads or shared entrances may be required to provide local access to individual properties. The provision of periodic, reliable passing lanes allow motorists increased opportunities to safely and easily pass slower vehicles, improving traffic flow at a much lower cost than a traditional expansion to four lanes.

There are three critical elements to the design of this type of facility: passing lane length and spacing, lane and shoulder width requirements, and signing and marking strategies.


PHASE II -60-

Passing Lane Length and Spacing The selection of an appropriate passing lane length and the spacing between passing lane segments are critical to the effect of the passing lane on travel delay. If the passing lane is too short, platoons are not effectively dispersed. If the lane is too long, efficiency is lost. Passing lanes should be located to best fit existing terrain. Uphill grades are preferred sites over downhill grades. Passing lanes on significant uphill grades should extend beyond the crest of the hill. Passing lane sections should be placed to avoid major intersections.

Lane and Shoulder Width Safety on highways is usually enhanced by the provision of wider lanes and shoulders that provide greater recovery room for errant drivers. Similarly, the provision of passing lanes also enhances safety through the accommodation of passing maneuvers that


PHASE II -61-

reduce platoon sizes and reduce the number of unsafe passes. Although conflicts do not always arise, providing a passing lane sometimes necessitates the temporary reduction of the shoulder and, occasionally, the lane width.

Lane widths typically recommended are either 12 ft or widths that matched adjacent roadway sections, while shoulder width recommendations ranged from “minimum” values of 4 to 6 ft to “desirable” values that matched adjacent roadway sections. . Several items should be considered in determining the shoulder width for a passing lane section. The addition or widening of a shoulder greatly improves safety—shoulder widening can reduce related accidents by up to approximately 50 percent with the addition of an 8-ft shoulder. Therefore, it follows that the presence of a shoulder in a passing lane section increases the overall safety of the passing lane. The presence of a shoulder also increases the driver’s comfort level. Additionally, driver expectancy may be violated when traveling from a two-lane section with a wide shoulder to a three-lane section with no shoulder or with a very narrow shoulder. However, passing lane sections are relatively short, and few vehicles are likely to stop in these sections. If vehicles do have to stop for an emergency, extra width for going around the vehicle is provided by the width of the additional lane.

Other user groups should also be considered in the provision of shoulders in passing lane sections. Pedestrians and bicyclists may also use the roadways with passing lane sections; if so, they may travel on the shoulder. Rumble strip installation also affects these users; if a rumble strip is placed in the center of the shoulder; usable space for pedestrians and bicyclists is limited.


PHASE II -62-

Signing and Marking By understanding what drivers perceive to be the purpose and meaning of signs and markings, designers can more effectively convey the intended use of the roadway.

• Regulatory signs to tell the driver to stay in the right lane unless passing

• Informational signs providing the distance to the next passing lane

• Pavement markings allowing or prohibiting passing, and Entrance pavement markings encouraging staying in the right lane

Advance signing should be provided regarding the upcoming passing lane so that drivers are aware of its presence. The preferred sign (and associated sign placement) is that the passing lane is upcoming in two miles. This sign will permit drivers to delay passing maneuvers until they can be made more comfortably, although passing may still be permitted prior to the passing lane section. A sign should be provided near the end of each passing lane section stating that in “X” distance another passing lane will be provided. This advance signing will inform the driver of the repetitive nature of the passing lane design, allowing the driver to understand the purpose and nature of the roadway’s characteristics. A dashed white line in the transition area extending from near the highway centerline to the beginning of the white dashed line separating the passing lane from the right lane should be provided.


PHASE II -63-

There are numerous rural areas that may benefit from this alternative, including the high-delay, hilly areas near Oxford, Greene, Sherburne, and Sangerfield. An adapted version of the 3-Lane section may also be utilized in municipal areas, by implementing a logical restricted-access policy in which commercial driveways are shared, to the extent possible.

Potential areas for consideration of 3-Lane sections along NY-12 may include:

• NY-12A to Brotzman Road • RM 97 to RM 98 • RM 103 to RM 106 (Climbing Lanes South of Greene) • RM 108 to RM 109 (Grooved Pavement Area) • RM 111 to RM 112 (Passing Lanes) • RM 115 to RM 119 (Approaching CR-3) • RM 140 to RM 142 (North Norwich – Sherburne) • RM 148 to RM 150 (North of Sherburne High School) • RM 157 to RM 162 (Hubbardsville)

Savings & Benefits:


PHASE II -64-

Delay savings on each segment would vary based on local conditions. Traffic volumes, passing opportunities, truck percentages, and existing terrain will all help to define any potential savings. As a rule of thumb, each mile of properly constructed 3-Lane section may save several seconds of delay to the commuter motorist. Economic Benefits: To be determined by WSA during the final economic analysis. Approximate Project Costs: Similar projects have been successfully constructed with varying costs. The Rule-of-Thumb estimate for planning-level analyses is approximately $2 million per mile.


PHASE II -65-

G. Limited Access Expressway on New Alignment

Although long-term and progressive in nature, the conversion of NY-12 from a fully or partially accessible arterial into a full limited access expressway may warrant consideration. With significant portions of NY-12 designated as part of the National Highway system, it serves a role in both strategic defense and mass public travel. Add the fact that Binghamton and Utica are the two largest New York cities not directly connected by an Interstate, and broad-brush, long-term upgrades should not be initially dismissed.

A limited access expressway would reduce travel time between Binghamton and Utica by approximately 30 minutes (compared to the I-81 / I-90 route), easily becoming the preferred route between the cities. Route Improvement Concept The expressway design standard is characterized by full access control; two (or more) travel lanes in each direction; and posted speeds of 55 miles per hour in urban areas and 65 miles per hour in rural areas. The proposed highway improvement includes approximately 84 miles of expressway development.


PHASE II -66-

Transportation Impacts In similar projects, the proposed improvements were projected to lead to a significant increase in vehicle-miles of travel (VMT) throughout the study area, compared to the “no build” forecast that assumes no changes to existing corridor. The average free-flow speed along NY-12 from Binghamton to Utica would increase to approximately 62 miles per hour, compared with approximately 46 miles per hour in the no-build forecast. Average daily traffic (ADT) would be expected to increase significantly along most segments of NY-12. Average daily trips would decrease on many of the parallel north-south routes, which would be characterized by slower speeds and longer driving times than NY-12. Due to the increase in average free-flow speeds along NY-12, the total travel time along the corridor between Binghamton and Utica would decrease more than 28 minutes. Adjusting for the elimination of signalization, the total decrease in travel time may be closer to 35 minutes along the entire corridor.

User Benefits The user benefits attributable to the NY-12 corridor improvement fall into three categories:

1. Travel time savings reflect the dollar value of the reduction in

vehicle hours of traffic (VHT) that is associated with the project.

2. Safety cost savings reflect the projected reduction in the number of accidents that would occur as a result of the improvement in the functional class of the facility, as seen in the reduction in congestion and the level of entering and exiting traffic.

3. Vehicle operating cost changes reflect changes in average

operating speed. With the decrease in congestion and signalization associated with the highway improvement, autos


PHASE II -67-

and trucks will be operating at speeds higher than their optimal speed for maximizing efficiency and fuel economy.

Economic Impacts The highway improvement project may produce three types of direct economic impacts:

1. Expansion of existing businesses associated with the direct business cost impact of the user benefits. These impacts are measured in terms of changes in cost and productivity measures for specific industries.

2. Attraction of new businesses to the study area associated

with the market access effects of the highway improvement. These impacts are measured in terms of direct new jobs by industry.

3. Changes in tourist activity in the corridor associated with the

market access affects of the highway improvement. These impacts are measured in terms of changes in visitor-days by type of visitor.

These direct economic impacts may also produce secondary impacts in the form of increased sales for businesses producing intermediate products and services (indirect impacts), and increased sales for businesses benefiting from consumer spending from workers in the direct and indirect jobs (induced impacts). The indirect and induced impacts are measured in terms of changes in regional employment, output, or income.


PHASE II -68-

Approximate Costs 1. Capital costs: The approximate planning-level capital cost for an

84-mile segment of the NY-12 expressway improvement concept is in excess of $750 million, including $550 million in construction costs and $200 million in right-of-way costs. The construction costs approximate roadway, bridge, interchange, grade separation, and traffic maintenance costs. The right-of-way costs approximate land acquisition, land improvement, and potential relocations.

2. Operations and maintenance costs: The annual operations and

maintenance costs for the NY-12 expressway improvement concept is estimated to be approximately $250,000 per year.

Additional Analysis to follow Economic determinations & Public

Involvement


PHASE II -69-

H. Grade Separated Interchanges

• NYS-79 • NYS-206 • NYS-41 • NYS-220

• NYS-80 • CR-88 • CR-74 • US-20

Although in theory grade-separated interchanges can generate significant reductions in travel delays, they do not appear to be fully advantageous when analyzing the corridor on a Regional Network level. For the NY-12 corridor, each will reduce delay by a few seconds, making the anticipated costs and accessibility impacts too large to overcome. Cost Analysis to follow Economic determinations & Public

Involvement


PHASE II -66-

I. Municipal By-Passes

• Norwich • New Berlin • Chenango Forks • Oxford • Sherburne • Sangerfield

Other than potential alternate routes around Norwich, bypasses around other population centers along the NY-12 corridor do not appear to be particularly advantageous, from a traffic delay standpoint. However, bypasses do include some secondary community benefits, by eliminating heavy truck traffic and potentially increasing safety on local streets. Cost Analysis to follow Economic determinations & Public

Involvement


PHASE II -67-

RECOMMENDATIONS


PHASE II -68-

6 RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 Alternative Screening Process

The Recommendations section will be completed following the Selection

of Alternatives, Public Input, and Economic Analysis tasks. The process

for choosing the proper recommendations will be as follows:

An Alternative Screening Process will be developed to help reduce the

number of alternatives under consideration. Alternatives that fail to meet

the identified evaluation criteria as determined by the Task-Force and the

NYSDOT, with due consideration of input obtained during the Public

Participation phase of the study, shall be eliminated from further

consideration.

Selection or dismissal of alternatives will be based on the identified

evaluation criteria, including, but not limited to the following:

• Ability to address the goals and objectives.

• Safety • Environmental • Socioeconomic

• Mobility • Land Use • Cost-Effectiveness • Freight Movement • Engineering

Documents

NYS ROUTE 12 CORRIDOR STUDY PHASE II I · 2008-08-23 · NYS ROUTE 12 CORRIDOR STUDY– PRELIMINARY DRAFT SEPTEMBER 2007 PHASE II -9- 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS 2.1 Analysis of Corridor