DRAFT DESIGN REPORT/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

NYS ROUTE 17/I-81 INTERCHANGE

SH 63-24, SH 64-1, SH 64-4, SH 64-5, SH 68-8

PIN 9500.61

CITY OF BINGHAMTON

TOWN OF DICKINSON

BROOME COUNTY

VOLUME 1

June 2007

TRANSPORTATION P

RO

JE

CT

RE

PO

RT

NEW YORK STATE

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ASTRID C. GLYNN, Commissioner

ELIOT L. SPITZER, Governor

UNITED STATES

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

PIN 9500.61

NYS Route 17/I-81 Interchange SH 63-24, SH 64-1, SH 64-5, SH 68-8

City of Binghamton Town of Dickinson

Broome County

Environmental Assessment

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

and

New York State Department of Transportation

Submitted pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c) and 49 U.S.C. 303. This assessment was prepared in consultation with FHWA and has been reviewed for scope and content and is released of comments. ___________________ ______________________________ DATE Director Design Division NYS Department of Transportation ___________________ ______________________________ DATE District Engineer Federal Highway Administration

TABLE OF CONTENTS – Volume 1

I. INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................................I-1

II. PROJECT IDENTIFICATION, EVOLUTION, CONDITIONS AND NEEDS, AND

OBJECTIVES........................................................................................................................................... II-1 A. Project Identification ...................................................................................................................II-1

A.1. Project Type.............................................................................................................................II-1 A.1.a. Highway Work ...................................................................................................................II-1 A.1.b. Bridge Work.......................................................................................................................II-1 A.1.c. Other Work.........................................................................................................................II-1

A.2. Project Location/Description ...................................................................................................II-1 B. Project Evolution .........................................................................................................................II-5 C. Conditions and Needs ..................................................................................................................II-7

C.1. Transportation Conditions, Deficiencies and Engineering Considerations .............................II-7 C.1.a. Functional Classification and National Highway System (NHS).......................................II-7 C.1.b. Ownership and Maintenance Jurisdiction...........................................................................II-7 C.1.c. Culture, Terrain and Climatic Conditions ..........................................................................II-7 C.1.d. Control of Access ...............................................................................................................II-8 C.1.e. Existing Highway Section ..................................................................................................II-8 C.1.f. Abutting Highway Segments and Future Plans for Abutting Highway Sections .............II-15 C.1.g. Speeds and Delay .............................................................................................................II-16 C.1.h. Traffic Volumes ...............................................................................................................II-16 C.1.i. Level of Service................................................................................................................II-17 C.1.j. Non-Standard Features and Non-Conforming Features ...................................................II-22 C.1.k. Safety Considerations, Accident History and Analysis ....................................................II-26 C.1.l. Pavement and Shoulder Conditions..................................................................................II-33 C.1.m. Guide Railing, Median Barrier, Impact Attenuators.........................................................II-33 C.1.n. Traffic Control Devices (Signs, Signals, etc.) ..................................................................II-35 C.1.o. Structures..........................................................................................................................II-35 C.1.p. Hydraulics of Bridges and Culverts..................................................................................II-42 C.1.q. Drainage Systems .............................................................................................................II-43 C.1.r. Soil and Foundation Conditions .......................................................................................II-45 C.1.s. Utilities .............................................................................................................................II-47 C.1.t. Railroads...........................................................................................................................II-48 C.1.u. Visual Environment..........................................................................................................II-48 C.1.v. Provisions for Pedestrians and Bicyclists .........................................................................II-48 C.1.w. Planned Development for Area ........................................................................................II-49 C.1.x. System Elements and Conditions .....................................................................................II-49 C.1.y. Environmental Integration................................................................................................II-49

C.2. Needs .....................................................................................................................................II-50 C.2.a. Project Level Needs..........................................................................................................II-50 C.2.b. Area or Corridor Level Needs ..........................................................................................II-51 C.2.c. Transportation Plans.........................................................................................................II-52

D. Project Objectives......................................................................................................................II-52

III. ALTERNATIVES........................................................................................................................III-1 A. Design Criteria........................................................................................................................... III-1

A.1. Standards ............................................................................................................................... III-1 A.2. Critical Design Elements ....................................................................................................... III-1 A.3. Other Controlling Parameters ................................................................................................ III-7

B. Alternatives Considered ............................................................................................................ III-7 C. Feasible Alternatives ............................................................................................................... III-14

C.1. Description of Feasible Alternatives.................................................................................... III-15 C.2. Engineering Considerations of Feasible Alternatives.......................................................... III-26

C.2.a. Special Geometric Features ............................................................................................ III-26 C.2.b. Traffic Forecasts, Level of Service and Safety Considerations ...................................... III-29 C.2.c. Pavement ........................................................................................................................ III-45 C.2.d. Structures........................................................................................................................ III-46 C.2.e. Hydraulics ...................................................................................................................... III-57 C.2.f. Drainage ......................................................................................................................... III-57 C.2.g. Maintenance Responsibility ........................................................................................... III-60 C.2.h. Maintenance and Protection of Traffic ........................................................................... III-60 C.2.i. Soils and Foundations..................................................................................................... III-63 C.2.j. Utilities ........................................................................................................................... III-64 C.2.k. Railroads......................................................................................................................... III-64 C.2.l. Right-of-Way.................................................................................................................. III-65 C.2.m. Landscaping Development ............................................................................................. III-66 C.2.n. Provisions for Pedestrians, Including Persons with Disabilities..................................... III-66 C.2.o. Provisions for Bicycling ................................................................................................. III-67 C.2.p. Lighting .......................................................................................................................... III-67

D. Project Costs and Schedule...................................................................................................... III-68 D.1. Costs .................................................................................................................................... III-68 D.2. Schedule .............................................................................................................................. III-69

IV. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS ...........................IV-1 A. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... IV-1 B. Social, Economic and Environmental Consequences ................................................................ IV-1

B.1. Social Consequences ............................................................................................................. IV-1 B.1.a. Affected Population.......................................................................................................... IV-1 B.1.b. Local Planning.................................................................................................................. IV-2 B.1.c. Community Cohesion....................................................................................................... IV-3 B.1.d. Changes in Travel Patterns or Accessibility ..................................................................... IV-3 B.1.e. Impacts on School Districts, Recreation Areas, Churches or Businesses......................... IV-4 B.1.f. Impacts on Police, Fire Protection, and Ambulance Access ............................................ IV-5 B.1.g. Impacts on Highway Safety, Traffic Safety and Overall Public Safety and Health ......... IV-5 B.1.h. General Social Groups Benefited or Harmed ................................................................... IV-5

B.2. Economic Consequences ..................................................................................................... IV-11 B.2.a. Impacts on Regional and Local Economies.................................................................... IV-11 B.2.b. Impacts on Existing Highway-Related Businesses......................................................... IV-11 B.2.c. Impacts on Established Business Districts ..................................................................... IV-12 B.2.d. Relocation Impacts ......................................................................................................... IV-12

B.3. Environmental Consequences.............................................................................................. IV-22 B.3.a. Surfaces Waters/Wetlands.............................................................................................. IV-22 B.3.b. Water Source Quality ..................................................................................................... IV-36 B.3.c. General Ecology and Wildlife ........................................................................................ IV-40 B.3.d. Historical and Cultural Resources .................................................................................. IV-43 B.3.e. Visual Resources ............................................................................................................ IV-44 B.3.f. Parks and Recreational Facilities.................................................................................... IV-51 B.3.g. Farmland Assessment ..................................................................................................... IV-52 B.3.h. Air, Noise and Energy .................................................................................................... IV-53 B.3.i. Contaminated Materials Assessment .............................................................................. IV-63 B.3.j. Construction Impacts...................................................................................................... IV-66 B.3.k. Anticipated Permits and Approvals ................................................................................ IV-67

B.4. Indirect/Secondary and Cumulative Impacts ....................................................................... IV-67 B.4.a. Indirect/Secondary Impacts ............................................................................................ IV-67 B.4.b. Cumulative Impacts........................................................................................................ IV-67

V. EVALUATION AND COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES ................................................ V-1

FIGURES Figure I-1 – New York State Project Location Map..................................................................................... I-2 Figure II-1 – Project Location Map.............................................................................................................II-2 Figure II-2 – Project Site Map.....................................................................................................................II-3 Figure II-3 – Project Area Base Mapping....................................................................................................II-4 Figure II-4 – Non-Standard Features.........................................................................................................II-23 Figure II-5 – Bridge Location Map ...........................................................................................................II-36 Figure II-6 – Watershed Areas West of the Chenango River ....................................................................II-44 Figure II-7 – Watershed Areas East of the Chenango River .....................................................................II-46 Figure III-1 – Proposed Non-Standard Features...................................................................................... III-27 Figure III-2 – Proposed Freeway Surveillance ........................................................................................ III-39 Figure III-3 – Proposed Variable Message Signs and Highway Advisory Radio Locations ................... III-41 Figure III-4 – Proposed Closed Loop Traffic Signal Systems................................................................. III-44 Figure III-5 – Proposed Bridge Plan........................................................................................................ III-51 Figure III-6 – Potential Locations for Stormwater Treatment ................................................................. III-59 Figure IV-1 – Census Tract 5 .................................................................................................................... IV-7 Figure IV-2 – Census Tract 5, Block Group 3........................................................................................... IV-7 Figure IV-3 – Census Tract 4 .................................................................................................................... IV-8 Figure IV-4 – Census Tract 4, Block Group 4........................................................................................... IV-8 Figure IV-5 – National Wetlands Inventory Map.................................................................................... IV-29 Figure IV-6 – New York State Freshwater Wetlands Map...................................................................... IV-30 Figure IV-7 – Wetland and Watercourse Locations and Existing Plant Communities Map ................... IV-32 Figure IV-8 – Sample Point and Photograph Locations .......................................................................... IV-33 Figure IV-9 – Endicott – Johnson City Aquifer Area.............................................................................. IV-37 Figure IV-10 – Clinton Street Ballpark Sole Source Aquifer.................................................................. IV-38 Figure IV-11 – Viewshed and Sensitive Land Uses ................................................................................ IV-46 Figure IV-12 – Visual Resources – Alternative D7................................................................................. IV-49 Figure IV-13 – Visual Resources – LaGrange Street and Prospect Street Interchange Alternatives....... IV-50 Figure IV-14 – Noise Analysis Locations ............................................................................................... IV-57 Figure IV-15 – Noise Barrier Analysis Locations – Alternative D7 ....................................................... IV-61

TABLES Table II-1 – No-Build Present and Projected Traffic Volumes .................................................................II-16 Table II-2 – Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis – Year 2002 Existing..........................................II-19 Table II-3 – Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis – Year 2041 No-Build........................................II-20 Table II-4 – Individual Lane Groups – Year 2041 No-Build ....................................................................II-21 Table II-5 – Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ........................................................................II-22 Table II-6 – Accident Summary ................................................................................................................II-28 Table II-7 – Summary of Existing Bridge Conditions...............................................................................II-37 Table II-8 – Existing Hydraulic Data for the Chenango River ..................................................................II-42 Table III-1 – Projected Traffic Volumes ................................................................................................. III-30 Table III-2 – Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis – Year 2041 Alternative D7, D7B, D7C and D7D................................................................................................................................................................. III-32 Table III-3 – Individual Lane Groups – Year 2041 ................................................................................. III-33 Table III-4 – Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ..................................................................... III-35 Table III-5 – ITS Phasing ........................................................................................................................ III-38 Table III-6 – Freeway Detectors and CCTV ........................................................................................... III-40 Table III-7 – Proposed Work at Project Bridges ..................................................................................... III-47 Table III-8 – Proposed Bridge Costs ....................................................................................................... III-54 Table III-9 – Proposed Bridge Reconstruction Type Description ........................................................... III-55 Table III-10 – Structural Options for Viaduct Spans 1-9 over CP Rail and Broad Avenue .................... III-56 Table III-11 – Retaining Wall Costs........................................................................................................ III-57 Table III-12 – Phase 1 Right-of-Way ...................................................................................................... III-66 Table III-13 – Phase 2 Right-of-Way ...................................................................................................... III-66

Table III-14 – Existing High Mast Lights ............................................................................................... III-68 Table IV-1 – Project Impacts to Existing Tax Base ................................................................................ IV-13 Table IV-2 – NYSDEC Water Body Classifications............................................................................... IV-22 Table IV-3 – Toler Analysis for Surface Water ...................................................................................... IV-24 Table IV-4 – Relative Abundance of Ecological Communities Identified within the Project Limits ..... IV-42 Table IV-5 – Level of Service and Volume Threshold Screening Results .............................................. IV-53 Table IV-6 – Summary of Total Mesoscale Design Hour Emissions...................................................... IV-55 Table IV-7 – Noise Analysis Locations................................................................................................... IV-56 Table IV-8 – Summary of Existing and Predicted Noise Levels1............................................................ IV-59 Table IV-9 – Impacted Receptors............................................................................................................ IV-59 Table IV-10 – Noise Barrier Feasibility Tabulation ................................................................................ IV-60 Table IV-11 – Summary of Conclusions & Recommendations for Sites of Environmental Concern..... IV-65 Table V-1 – Roadside Treatment Options (Alternative D7)....................................................................... V-1 Table V-2 – Roadside Treatment Options (Alternative D7B/D7C/D7D)................................................... V-1 Table V-3 – NY 17 WB Partial Interchange Options ................................................................................. V-2 Table V-4 – Phase 2 Project Alternatives................................................................................................... V-4

APPENDICES (Bound Separately)

Appendix A – Analysis, Inspection and Evaluation Reports Appendix B – Traffic Volumes and Analysis Results Appendix C – Correspondence Appendix D – Alternatives Considered Appendix E – Photo Simulations

TABLE OF CONTENTS – Volume 2 (Bound Separately)

Existing Plans and Profiles Typical Sections, Plans and Profiles – Alternative D7 – Phase 1 Typical Sections, Plans and Profiles – LaGrange Street Interchange Alternative Typical Sections, Plans and Profiles – Prospect Street Interchange Alternative Typical Sections, Plans and Profiles – Alternative D7 – Phase 2 Typical Sections, Plans and Profiles – Alternative D7B – Phase 2 Typical Sections, Plans and Profiles – Alternative D7C – Phase 2 Typical Sections, Plans and Profiles – Alternative D7D – Phase 2 Maintenance and Protection of Traffic – Alternative D7 – Phase 1 Maintenance and Protection of Traffic – Alternative D7 – Phase 2

I-1

I. INTRODUCTION

This Design Report/Environmental Assessment (DR/EA) describes and evaluates a proposed

NYSDOT project to eliminate the operational deficiencies that negatively affect the safety of the NYS Route 17/Interstate 81 Interchange in the city of Binghamton and town of Dickinson, Broome County, New York. (See Figure I-1) The proposed project will also eliminate the structural deficiencies of the bridges that carry NYS Route 17 and Interstate 81 over the Chenango River. NYS Route 17 (SH 68-8, Johnson City-Binghamton; SH 64-5, Chenango River-Mygatt Street) is the primary east-west highway corridor across the southern tier of New York State, while Interstate 81 (SH 64-4, Interstate Rt. 505 Chenango River-Bevier Street Extension; SH 64-1, Interstate Rt. 505 Bevier Street Extension-Hinmans Corners) is the primary north-south corridor through central New York. Both highways are integral parts of the regional transportation system. These two roadways come together at the NY 17/I-81 Interchange and the NY 17/I-81 overlap section (SH 63-24, Binghamton State Hospital to Chenango River) continues for approximately 7 kilometers before the roadways split. The western project limit on NY 17 is approximately RM 17-9107-2000, the northern project limit on I-81 is approximately RM 81I-9101-3003 and the eastern project limit on the NY 17/I-81 overlap section is approximately RM 81I-9101-2016. The proposed alternative, which will be constructed in two phases, will eliminate the operational deficiencies of the NY 17/I-81 Interchange which negatively affect the safety within the project area. The Phase 1 improvements to NY 17 EB and WB, from the western project limit to the Chenango River are those necessary to receive Interstate 86 designation for this portion of NY 17. The remainder of the work in the Phase 1 project and the entire Phase 2 project are necessary to eliminate structural, safety and capacity deficiencies within the project area. The DR/EA presents the project alternatives, identifies potential social, economic and environmental impacts, and serves as an overall decision-making tool. While the proposed alternative will be designed and constructed in a two-phased approach as discussed below, the identification of potential social, economic and environmental impacts are based on the overall project.

Phase 1 of the proposed alternative will eliminate the operational deficiencies of the NY 17 EB and

NY 17 EB/I-81 NB ramp (Ramp EA) diverge and the NY 17 WB and I-81 SB/NY 17 WB ramp (Ramp EB) merge. This will be accomplished by shifting the NY 17 EB/Ramp EA diverge and the NY 17 WB/Ramp EB merge to the tangent west of Prospect Mountain. The NY 17 EB and WB bridges over Mygatt Street will be reconstructed to accommodate the new roadway configuration and provide improved vertical clearance over Mygatt Street. The NY 17 EB off ramp to US 11 (Ramp F) will be reconstructed to provide a three-lane approach to US 11 along with a 210 meter long deceleration lane along NY 17 EB. US 11, south of the intersection with Ramp F, will have one US 11 southbound lane through the Prospect Street intersection and a southbound right turn lane. In the northbound direction, US 11 will have a single through lane and a 70 meter left turn lane on the approach to the Prospect Street intersection. US 11 will match the existing roadway configuration approximately 190 meters south of Prospect Street. In addition, a new partial interchange will be constructed on NY 17 WB to replace the existing exit ramp to Mygatt Street that is being eliminated due to the shift in the NY 17 WB/Ramp EB merge point. Two alternatives are being investigated for the new partial interchange. The LaGrange Street Interchange will provide a NY 17 WB off ramp and on ramp that connect to LaGrange Street approximately 275 meters west of Mygatt Street. The Prospect Street Interchange will provide a NY 17 WB off ramp and on ramp that tie into a connector road to Prospect Street. The connector road will consist of two 3.6 meter lanes in each direction and will cross under a new bridge to be constructed on NY 17 and tie into Prospect Street approximately 475 meters west of Mygatt Street, just west of Spring Forest Cemetery. A new traffic signal will be constructed at the connector road intersection with the NY 17 WB ramps. The previous stated improvements along NY 17 EB and WB are the improvements necessary to receive Interstate 86 designation for this portion of NY 17.

The Phase 1 project will also eliminate the structural deficiencies of BINs 1031181, 1031182,

103118A and 103118B which carry NY 17 and I-81 over the Chenango River by replacing these structures adjacent to the existing structures. The NY 17/I-81 bridges over Chenango Street will be replaced in the first phase to accommodate the shifted roadway in Phase 1 and the additional widening necessary for Phase 2. Phase 1 will tie into the existing NY 17/I-81 overlap section approximately 260 meters east of Chenango Street. There are three options being investigated for slope treatment on the south side of the NY 17/I81 overlap section between the Chenango River and Interchange 4. The Wall1 option would construct a

LOCATION MAP

DATE: 12/06 FIGURE: I-1

P.I.N. 9500.61 – NY 17/I-81 Interchange CITY OF BINGHAMTON, TOWN OF DICKINSON

BROOME COUNTY, NEW YORK

NOT TO SCALE

M:\1537400\hwy\reports\figures\location map.doc

I-2

I-3

retaining wall at the approximate existing highway boundary, the Wall2 option would construct a retaining wall at the edge of the roadway and the Slope option would construct a 1 on 2 slope from the edge of the roadway without a retaining wall. Each of these options has varying impacts on the residential properties along the south side of the overlap section as discussed later in the report. Noise walls are proposed along portions of NY 17 EB, NY 17 WB and on the south side of the NY 17/I-81 overlap section from the east end of the bridge over the Chenango River to approximately 35 meters east of Chenango Street. In addition, there will be a rock cut required along Prospect Mountain as Ramp EB is being shifted toward the mountain. The primary objectives of the first phase of the project are to construct the necessary improvements to receive Interstate 86 designation for this portion of NY 17 and to replace the aging bridges that carry NY 17 and I-81 over the Chenango River.

Phase 2 of the proposed alternative will eliminate the operational deficiencies of the NY 17/I-81

overlap section by eliminating the weaving movements between the NY 17/I-81 Interchange and Interchange 4. This will be accomplished by constructing a NY 17 EB direct connection ramp from the west side of the Chenango River to the NY 17/I-81 overlap section and by also constructing a NY 17 WB on ramp that will allow traffic from Interchange 4 to access NY 17 WB on the west side of the Chenango River. The NY 17 EB roadway and bridge from Phase 1 will become an off ramp when the Phase 2 project is complete and will allow NY 17 EB traffic to access Interchange 4. The NY 17/I-81 overlap section will be widened to provide a 3-lane mainline section in the westbound/northbound direction and a 4-lane mainline section in the eastbound/southbound direction that will taper to 3 lanes east of the NY 17 EB/I-81 SB bridge over NY 7. US 11, north of the intersection with Ramp F, will be reconstructed to provide a roadway section that consists of one southbound travel lane, two northbound travel lanes and a multi-use path between US 11 and the Chenango River.

There are four alternatives being investigated for improvements to Interchange 4 as part of the Phase 2

project. Alternative D7 retains the cloverleaf configuration, but would shift the ramps in the northeast quadrant to provide additional weaving length on the WB/NB collector distributor (CD) road between the loop ramps. Standard acceleration and deceleration lanes would be provided along the EB/SB and WB/NB CD roads adjacent to the NY 17/I-81 overlap section. Alternative D7B would replace the existing cloverleaf configuration of Interchange 4 with a diamond interchange configuration. The weaving movements associated with the cloverleaf configuration would be eliminated and two traffic signals would be constructed at the intersections of the ramps with NY 7. The EB/SB and WB/NB CD roads would be eliminated and standard acceleration/deceleration lanes would be constructed for the on and off ramps. NY 7 would require widening from just north of Frederick Street to the Bevier Street overpass. Alternative D7C would construct a partial diamond/cloverleaf ramp configuration to replace the existing cloverleaf configuration. The WB/NB on and off ramps would resemble the cloverleaf ramps of Alternative D7 and the EB/SB on and off ramps would be the same as the diamond on and off ramps of Alternative D7B. This alternative would provide additional weaving length on the WB/NB CD road between the loop ramps and would eliminate the weaving movements on NY 7 within Interchange 4. Standard acceleration and deceleration lanes would be provided along the WB/NB CD road and also for the NY 17 EB/I-81 SB on ramp. NY 7 would require widening from its intersection with Frederick Street to the Bevier Street overpass. In addition, southbound NY 363, south of Frederick Street, would need to be widened to accommodate the third southbound thru lane on NY 7. The third southbound lane on NY 363 would extend 250 meters south of Frederick Street and would then taper to the existing two lane configuration. The widening of southbound NY 363 would require the widening of BIN 1003670, which carries NY 363 over NY 7 SB. The NY 7 SB roadway that is adjacent to NY 363 would be changed so that the exit terminal would be a tapered type exit terminal as opposed to the parallel type exit terminal that currently exists, this is because any additional widening in the southwest quadrant of the NY 7/Frederick Street intersection would impact the city of Binghamton pump station located in this quadrant. Alternative D7D is an alternative that came out of the Value Engineering Study for the project and would eliminate all of the weaving movements at Interchange 4. This alternative is a hybrid of Alternative D7B in that there would be two traffic signals at the ramp intersections with NY 7, but they are spaced further apart and there would be one remaining loop ramp for the highest volume PM peak hour movement at the interchange. The EB/SB on and off ramps would be the same as the diamond ramps of Alternatives D7B and D7C. In the WB/NB direction, the loop ramp to NY 7 SB would be eliminated with this traffic using the off ramp to the traffic signal at the NY 7 intersection with the WB/NB off and on ramps. The large volume NY 7 NB

I-4

movement to the NB/WB CD road would be a free flow movement by continuing to utilize a loop ramp. This configuration eliminates the existing high volume weaving movement between the loop ramps on the WB/NB CD road. East of Interchange 4, the WB/NB off ramp to NY 7 would utilize a standard parallel deceleration lane from the mainline. A single lane WB/NB CD road would begin at the juncture with the loop ramp from NY 7 northbound and continue to the west where it would join with the WB/NB ramp from NY 7. NY 7 would require widening from just north of Frederick Street to the Bevier Street overpass.

Also as part of the Phase 2 project, approximately 355 meters of the existing 725 meter viaduct, BINs

1013071 and 1013072, that carries the NY 17/I-81 overlap section over NY 7(Brandywine Highway), the Canadian Pacific Rail Yard and Broad Avenue is proposed to be removed and replaced with an embankment section. The section of viaduct that passes over NY 7 will be reconstructed and the remainder of the viaduct will either be rehabilitated and widened or reconstructed and widened to accommodate the additional lanes. The Phase 2 project will tie into the existing roadway configuration approximately 270 meters east of Broad Avenue. Noise walls are proposed along the north side of the NY 17/I-81 overlap section between the Chenango River and Interchange 4, along the south side of the NY 17/I-81 overlap section between the end of the Phase 1 noise wall and Interchange 4 and along the north and south side of the overlap section from Broad Avenue to approximately 450 meters east/south of Broad Avenue.

Direct connect ramp design standards are being used for all mainline roadway connections between

NY 17, I-81 and the NY 17/I-81 overlap section. These roadways will consist of 2-3.75 meter travel lanes with a 3.0 meter outside shoulder and a 1.2 meter inside shoulder. Interstate design standards are being used beyond the direct connect ramps, where the two lane roadways join to become three and four lane roadways. Interstate design standards consist of 3.6 meter travel lanes, a 3.0 meter outside shoulder, a 1.2 meter inside shoulder and a minimum 3.0 meter median between mainline roadways. Single lane ramp travel lane widths vary between 4.5 and 5.8 meters with 2.0 meter outside shoulders and 1.0 meter inside shoulders. The EB/SB and WB/NB CD roads at Interchange 4 have 3.6 meter travel lanes, 3.0 meter outside shoulder and 1.2 meter inside shoulder. Acceleration lanes, deceleration lanes and combination acceleration/deceleration lanes have the same travel lane width as the adjacent roadways, either 3.6 meters or 3.75 meters. The shoulder width for acceleration/deceleration lanes is 1.2 meters, 1.8 meters or 3.0 meters depending on its location. The Phase 1 project will require retaining walls along the south side of NY 17 EB between Mygatt Street and Ramp F due to the shift in the roadway to the south, between NY 17 WB and Ramp EA, between Ramp EA and NY 17 EB and on the south side of the NY 17/I-81 overlap section to prevent impacts to Cheri Lindsey Park. The Phase 2 project will require a retaining wall along the north side of the NY 17/I-81 overlap section from 115 meters west of Chenango Street to just east of the residential properties near Interchange 4. The portion of this wall adjacent to Chenango Street will be constructed during the Phase 1 project during construction of the replacement structure over Chenango Street. There are three separate options being investigated for the roadside treatment on the south side of the overlap section from Cheri Lindsey Park to Interchange 4 that will be constructed as part of the Phase 1 project. The first option is to construct a 1V:2H slope to a retaining wall at approximately the existing highway boundary and providing a 4.5 meter permanent easement at the bottom of the wall, the second option is constructing a retaining wall at the roadside that would minimize impacts to all properties and the third option is constructing a 1V:2H slope without a retaining wall that requires acquisition of most of the properties on the north side of Truesdell Street and Moffatt Avenue. A retaining wall is also required along the north side of the new NY 17 WB on ramp and off ramp for the Prospect St. Interchange option that may replace the NY 17 WB exit to Mygatt Street as part of the Phase 1 project.

An additional component of the project is the assessment of Intelligent Transportation System (ITS)

needs throughout the NY 17, I-81 and I-88 corridors in the Binghamton Metropolitan Area. It has been recognized that the segment of the New York State highway system where NY 17 and I-81 overlap and where I-88 connects to I-81 is critical to economic viability of upstate New York. This section of highway carries particularly high volumes of commercial traffic. There are 6 existing permanent VMS within the project area that serve to divert traffic during non-recurring incidents. The need to implement additional ITS enhancements in order to minimize delays and congestion that result from non-recurring incidents is warranted by nature of the roadways and the volumes and types of traffic that they carry. The intent of the ITS effort is to provide appropriate ITS devices on the freeways, to improve traffic control on the surface street diversion routes and to provide for traffic management during the interchange reconstruction and

I-5

after construction is complete. The ITS elements proposed for the project will conform to the adopted Binghamton Regional ITS Architecture.

The environmental section of this document evaluates the potential social, economic, and environmental impacts of the feasible alternatives. The project is classified as a Class III project under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and a Non-Type II (EA) project under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR). This report was prepared utilizing guidance materials of the Federal Highway Administration (23 CFR 771 and T6640.8A) to assure full consideration of socioeconomic and environmental factors in transportation decision-making. The NYS Department of Transportation (DOT) has been designated the lead agency for SEQR. The project is being designed and progressed in accordance with the following NYSDOT documents, which include guidance regarding the Department’s Environmental/Public Involvement Policy and Procedures:

• Project Development Manual (PDM)

• Highway Design Manual (HDM)

• NYSDOT Bridge Manual

• Environmental Procedures Manual (EPM) The DR/EA identifies all potential project impacts, considers alternative courses of action, and

documents agency and public involvement. This report will be distributed to interested Federal, State and local agencies and officials for review

and comment. This document will also be made available to the public and to groups and individuals who have special interest, concerns or expertise, for review and comment. Two Public Informational Meetings have been held and a Public Hearing will also be held to present the feasible alternative(s) and obtain public comments. The Final Design Report/ Environmental Assessment will include responses to all official comments received at the Public Hearing, and will identify the preferred project alternative that will be progressed to final design and construction.

Additional information regarding this project can be obtained from:

New York State Department of Transportation Region 9 44 Hawley Street Binghamton, New York 13901-3200 Attn: Mr. John R. Williams, Regional Director 607-721-8116

II-1

II. PROJECT IDENTIFICATION, EVOLUTION, CONDITIONS AND NEEDS, AND

OBJECTIVES

A. Project Identification

A.1. Project Type

A.1.a. Highway Work

The highway work for the project includes new construction and reconstruction of

NY 17, I-81, the NY 17/I-81 overlap section, the direct connect ramps between these roadways, the entrance/exit ramps at Interchange 72 on NY 17 and at Interchange 4 within the NY 17/I-81 overlap section. Additional highway work includes replacing a portion of the viaduct with an embankment section and reconstructing US 11 from Bevier Street to its approach into the city of Binghamton. In addition, there will be improvements to LaGrange Street and Mygatt Street if the LaGrange Street Interchange option is chosen to replace the NY 17 WB off ramp to Mygatt Street and NY 7 will be widened under Alternatives D7B, D7C and D7D if one of those alternatives is chosen for Interchange 4.

A.1.b. Bridge Work

The bridge work for the Phase 1 project includes reconstructing the NY 17 bridge

over Mygatt Street (BIN 1063249), new bridges to replace the existing bridges that carry NY 17 and I-81 over US 11 and the Chenango River (BINs 1031181, 1031182, 103118A, 103118B) and replacement of the NY 17 EB/I-81 SB and NY 17 WB/I-81 NB bridges over Chenango Street (BINs 1013061 and 1013062). Additionally, a new bridge will be required on NY 17 in the Phase 1 project if the Prospect Street Interchange option is chosen to replace the Mygatt Street exit ramp from NY 17 WB.

The bridge work for the Phase 2 project includes constructing a new NY 17 EB

bridge over the Chenango River, constructing a new bridge over the Chenango River for the NY 17 WB on ramp from Interchange 4 and elimination of the bridges that carry the ramps to and from NY 7 NB (BINs 101307A, 101307B, 101307C and 101307D). Additional bridge work includes infilling portions of the viaduct west of NY 7 and also east of NY 7 between the roadway and the Canadian Pacific Rail Yard. The remainder of the viaduct that carries the NY 17/I-81 overlap section over the Canadian Pacific Rail Yard and Broad Avenue (BINs 1013071 and 1013072) with either be rehabilitated and widened or reconstructed and widened. If Alternative D7C is chosen as the preferred option at Interchange 4 it will require widening the southbound side of BIN 1003670 which carries NY 363 over NY 7 SB approximately 360 meters south of Frederick Street.

A.1.c. Other Work

Miscellaneous work for the project includes the construction of retaining walls,

noise walls, permanent stormwater management facilities, intelligent transportation system initiatives and relocation of a railroad spur line.

A.2. Project Location/Description

The project involves improvements to the roadways within and around the directional,

three-leg NY 17/I-81 Interchange in the city of Binghamton and town of Dickinson, Broome County (See Figure II-1). The western project limit on NYS Route 17 (S.H. 68-8 Johnson City-Binghamton; S.H. 64-5 Chenango River to Mygatt Street) is approximately 1350 meters west of Mygatt Street at RM 17-9107-2000. The northern project limit on Interstate 81 (S.H. 64-1 Interstate Rte. 505 Bevier Street Extension-Hinmans Corners; S.H. 64-4 Interstate Rte 505 Chenango River to Bevier Street Extension) is at the pedestrian bridge over I-81 at RM 81I-9101-3003. The eastern project limit on the NY 17/I-81 overlap section (S.H. 63-24 Binghamton State Hospital to Chenango River) is approximately 270 meters east of Broad Avenue at RM 81I-9101-2016. The project includes work on approximately 2.8 kilometers of NY 17, 0.8 kilometers of I-81 and 1.7 kilometers of the NY 17/I-81 overlap section. See Figure II-2 for the Project Site Map and Figure II-3 for the Project Area Mapping.

PROJECT LOCATION MAP

DATE: 7/04 FIGURE: II-1

P.I.N. 9500.61 – NY 17/I-81 Interchange CITY OF BINGHAMTON, TOWN OF DICKINSON

BROOME COUNTY, NEW YORK

NOT TO SCALE

PROJECT

LOCATION

M:\1537400\hwy\reports\figures\location map.doc

II-2

PROJECT SITE MAP

DATE: 12/06 FIGURE: II-2

P.I.N. 9500.61 – NY 17/I-81 Interchange CITY OF BINGHAMTON, TOWN OF DICKINSON

BROOME COUNTY, NEW YORK

NOT TO SCALE

PROJECT AREA

M:\1604600 17-81\hwy\reports\figures\project site map.doc

PROJECT LIMIT

RM 17-9107-2000

PROJECT LIMIT

RM 81I-9101-3003

PROJECT LIMIT

RM 81I-9101-2016 RM 17-9107-2010

RM 81I-9101-3000

RM 81I-9101-3010

RM 81I-9101-2020

II-3

II-5

The following bridges are within the limits of the project:

� BIN 1063249 – NY 17 EB/WB over Mygatt Street

• BIN 1031181 – I-81 SB over the Chenango River, US Route 11 and Ramp EA

• BIN 1031182 – I-81 NB over the Chenango River and US Route 11

• BIN 103118A – NY 17 EB over the Chenango River and US Route 11

• BIN 103118B – NY 17 WB over the Chenango River, US Route 11, Ramp EA and BIN 1031182

• BIN 1031190 – Pedestrian bridge over I-81 NB/SB

• BIN 1013061 – NY 17 WB/I-81 NB over Chenango Street

• BIN 1013062 – NY 17 EB/I-81 SB over Chenango Street

• BIN 101307A – Ramp from NY 7 NB to NY 17 EB/I-81 SB (Ramp BO)

• BIN 101307B – Ramp from NY 17 EB/I-81 SB to NY 7 NB (Ramp BI)

• BIN 101307C – Ramp from NY 7 NB to NY 17 WB/I-81 NB (Ramp AI)

• BIN 101307D – Ramp from NY 17 WB/I-81 NB to NY 7 NB (Ramp AO)

• BIN 1013071 – NY 17 WB/I-81 NB viaduct over NY 7, Canadian Pacific Rail Yard and Broad Avenue

• BIN 1013072 – NY 17 EB/I-81 SB viaduct over NY 7, Canadian Pacific Rail Yard and Broad Avenue

• BIN 1003670 – NY 363 over NY 7 SB

B. Project Evolution

NY 17 in Broome County is part of an east-west route linking the Hudson Valley and Lake Erie

via the Catskill Mountains and the Southern Tier Region of New York. The section of (former) NY 17 from Corning, New York, to its junction with I-90 near Erie, Pennsylvania, has been designated as I-86. The section of NY 17 from Harriman, New York (junction with I-87), to Corning is to be designated as I-86 as required improvements are completed.

The section of NY 17 in Broome County is a controlled access facility. The project area includes

the three-point, three-level interchange that connects NY 17 with I-81, a north-south Interstate Highway extending from the New York-Ontario border to the southern Appalachian Mountains. I-88, which begins at its junction with I-81 just north of the project area, connects Binghamton to the Albany area.

The NY 17/I-81 Interchange and adjacent section of NY 17 were constructed in the early 1960’s.

Average daily traffic volumes on NY 17 in the project area have increased from about 35,000 at the time of completion to about 67,000 in 2002. Growth in traffic is attributed both to the attraction of through trips resulting from factors such as completion of I-88 from Binghamton to the Albany area, completion of I-390 from Corning to Rochester, and to increased use of the freeways for local and regional trips.

In 1995, the NYSDOT completed the Interstate 81/NYS Route 17 Interchange Study for the

project area which identified a number of safety and operational problems and attributed these problems to increased traffic volumes and various design shortcomings. The study recommended solutions ranging from minor improvements to full reconstruction involving new freeway alignments and new interchange configurations. The Interstate 81/NYS Route 17 Interchange Study did not result in the advancement of major capital projects, but subsequent rehabilitation projects incorporated some of the study’s recommended safety and operational improvements as interim measures.

There were two public information meetings conducted by NYSDOT and Binghamton

Metropolitan Transportation Study (BMTS) during the scoping phase of the project to familiarize the public and the business community with the project and to obtain their early input. The purpose of the meetings was to identify those issues that the public feels are most important to consider in the further development of the project.

There were four concepts investigated during the scoping phase of the project that were included

in the Moderately Expanded Project Proposal (MEPP) dated January 2002. Alternative A1 used interstate

II-6

mainline standards for reconstructing the NY 17 portion of the freeway system. Alternative B used interstate mainline standards for the NY 17 and I-81 portions of the freeway system. The ‘C’ Alternatives placed emphasis on the NY 17 approach to and departure from the NY 17/I-81 interchange. The ‘D’ Alternatives were the comprehensive solution for the overall study area that incorporated improvements from the ‘C’ Alternatives while also improving the safety and operational deficiencies between the NY 17/I-81 Interchange and Interchange 4. Alternatives A, B, D1 and D2 were eliminated from consideration during the scoping phase of the project due to the impacts associated with each of the alternatives.

Preliminary design for the project was started in September 2002 with the development of

Alternatives C and C1, which would provide improvements to NY 17 EB and WB that would allow this portion of NY 17 to be designated I-86. During the preliminary study phase of the project, a structure evaluation of BINs 1031181, 1031182, 103118A and 103118B concluded that these bridges over the Chenango River should be replaced in the near future. Alternative C2 was thus developed to provide for the improvements necessary to achieve I-86 designation for NY 17 EB and WB as well as replace the existing NY 17/I-81 bridges over the Chenango River. A comprehensive solution for the overall project area was then developed that incorporated Alternative C2 as a Phase 1 project with improvements proposed to eliminate the safety and operational deficiencies between the NY 17/I-81 Interchange and Interchange 4 as a Phase 2 project. The comprehensive solution that evolved from the incorporation of these safety and operational improvements with the Phase 1 improvements is Alternative D7.

As preliminary design continued, it was determined that the project needed to investigate options

for accessing the property in the vicinity of Interchange 4, specifically the property between NY 7 and the railroad tracks from Frederick Street on the south to Bevier Street on the north. The study included investigating whether or not Frederick Street, east of NY 7, could be opened back up to allow left turns from NY 7 SB and thru movements from Frederick Street, west of NY 7. The study also included investigating alternative ramp configurations for Interchange 4. These alternative ramp configurations included maintaining the full cloverleaf, constructing a diamond interchange to replace the full cloverleaf or constructing a half diamond/half cloverleaf interchange to replace the full cloverleaf. The traffic study concluded that opening up additional access to Frederick Street, east of NY 7, was not a feasible option because an acceptable level of service could not be achieved for the NY 7/Frederick Street traffic signal. The study also determined that alternative access to this property could be provided via a service road that would tie NY 7 into a future connector road between Montgomery Street on the south side of the highway and North Griswold Street on the north side of the highway. The NY 17 EB/I-81 SB on ramp would diverge from the future service road approximately 140 meters east of NY 7. This service road concept could only be incorporated into the diamond interchange alternative and the half diamond/half cloverleaf alternative, therefore these alternative interchange configurations were added to the project as Alternative D7B and Alternative D7C, respectively. These alternatives are the same as Alternative D7 with the exception of the ramp configurations at Interchange 4. The traffic study for property access improvements at Interchange 4 and Frederick Street is included in a separate technical appendix.

There have been two public informational meetings held for the project in which the proposed

alternatives were presented for review and comment. The first meeting was held on August 23, 2005 at Roosevelt Elementary School and the second meeting was held at Broome Community College on November 3, 2005. There have also been two neighborhood meetings held for the project. The first neighborhood meeting was held February 21, 2006 at the Polish Community Home on Prospect Street for all property owners west of the Chenango River. The second neighborhood meeting, for property owners east of the Chenango River, was held on February 28, 2006 at Roosevelt Elementary School.

A Value Engineering (VE) Study was performed on the project between January 29, 2007 and

February 2, 2007. The designer presentation on January 29, 2007 provided an overview of the project constraints and alternatives to the VE team. The VE team presented there recommendations to the designers and NYSDOT on February 2, 2007. The VE study identified alternate design schemes, construction methods and project delivery options. The majority of the alternate design schemes focused on the Interchange 4 ramp configurations due to their concerns about the level of service of the weaving movement between the two WB/NB loop ramps between the CD road and NY 7. This weaving section has a LOS E during the design year even with two of the Interchange 4 alternatives providing twice the weaving length that currently exists. One of the alternatives developed by the VE team that would

II-7

eliminate this weaving movement is being incorporated into the design of the project as Alternative D7D and is further discussed in Chapter III of this document.

C. Conditions and Needs

C.1. Transportation Conditions, Deficiencies and Engineering Considerations

C.1.a. Functional Classification and National Highway System (NHS)

The functional classification of NY 17 and I-81 beyond the limits of the

interchange is Interstate. The two lane roadways connecting NY 17, I-81 and the NY 17/I-81 overlap section within the interchange have a functional classification of direct connection ramp. All other entrance and exit roadways to NY 17 and I-81 are classified as ramps. The functional classifications of other roadways in the project area are as follows:

• US 11 (Front Street) – Urban Minor Arterial

• NY 7/NY 363 (Brandywine Highway) – Urban Principal Arterial

• Prospect Street – Urban Collector

• LaGrange Street – Urban Local

• Mygatt Street – Urban Local

• Chenango Street – Urban Minor Arterial

• Broad Avenue – Urban Collector

C.1.b. Ownership and Maintenance Jurisdiction

NY 17, I-81, NY 17/I-81 overlap section, NY 363 and NY 7 are owned and

maintained by the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT). US 11 (Front Street), north of the Binghamton City Line, is owned and maintained by the NYSDOT. US 11, south of the Binghamton City Line, is owned and maintained by the city of Binghamton as are LaGrange Street, Mygatt Street, Prospect Street, Chenango Street and Broad Avenue.

C.1.c. Culture, Terrain and Climatic Conditions

The project is located in an urban environment. Approaching the NY 17/I-81

Interchange from the west, NY 17 follows the south side of Prospect Mountain. Land use on the north and south side of NY 17 in this area is mostly residential, although a major feature of the area is the Spring Forest Cemetery, located on Prospect Street, which parallels NY 17 south of the highway. A city of Binghamton owned park, Valley Street Park, is located south of Prospect Street between Valley Street, Franklin Street and US 11.

The NY 17/I-81 Interchange is located at the base of Prospect Mountain, with a

portion of the interchange elevated above US Route 11 and the Chenango River. This area is not conducive to development. Otsiningo County Park is located further north on the west bank of the Chenango River, adjacent to I-81 NB. On the west side of I-81 north of the interchange, land use is commercial and residential.

In the area of the NY 17/I-81 overlap section to the east, there is a mixture of

residential, commercial and industrial land uses. The area between the east bank of the Chenango River and Interchange 4 is residential and is the location of another city of Binghamton owned park, Cheri Lindsey Memorial Park, which is on the south side of the NY 17/I-81 overlap section. From east of Interchange 4 to Broad Avenue, the land use switches to commercial and industrial. The overlap section is elevated for most of its length and crosses over the following north-south oriented features: Chenango Street; NY 7 (Brandywine Highway); Montgomery Street (not a through street); New York, Susquehanna and Western Railroad (spur track); Canadian Pacific Rail Yard and Broad Avenue. East of Broad Avenue the land use changes back to residential north and south of the overlap section with a city of Binghamton owned park, Boland Park, just north of the Interchange 3 off ramp to Broad Avenue. Binghamton High

II-8

School’s Alumni Stadium is located just south of the NY 17/I-81 overlap section approximately 350 meters east of Broad Avenue.

The project is located in rolling terrain. The interchange has southern and eastern

exposure; the northwest sector is shaded in the afternoon by Prospect Mountain. Roadway surfaces are susceptible to ice formation, especially on bridges. Fog conditions may persist due to the valley setting and the Chenango River. Glare from the sun reflecting off wet pavement along NY 17 EB in the mornings during sunrise is also known to be a problem.

C.1.d. Control of Access

There is full control of access to NY 17, I-81 the NY 17/I-81 overlap section and

NY 363. There is full control of access to NY 7 and US 11 north of its intersection with Prospect Street. There is no control of access to US 11, south of the Prospect Street intersection, Prospect Street, LaGrange Street, Mygatt Street, Chenango Street and Broad Avenue. The control of access at the NY 17 WB off ramp to Mygatt Street does not meet current design standards as the intersection of Mygatt Street with LaGrange Street and Ridge Street is within 15 meters of the off ramp intersection with Mygatt Street. There is control of access at the Ramp F intersection with US 11 and at all of the ramps at Interchange 4. The control of access at the ramps at Broad Avenue does not meet current design standards as a side street intersection and a driveway are within 30 meters of the ramp intersections with Broad Avenue.

C.1.e. Existing Highway Section

Plans and profiles for existing NY 17, I-81, NY 17/I-81 overlap, their ramps and

the side roads in the project area are included in Volume 2 of the report.

NY 17 – In the eastbound direction, NY 17 consists of 3-3.6 meter travel lanes from the western project limit to the off ramp to US 11-Front Street (Ramp F). At this point NY 17 begins to widen to 4-3.6 meter travel lanes to match the 4 lanes at the diverge point of Ramp EA to I-81 NB and NY 17 EB to the overlap section. From here, NY 17 EB continues with 2-3.6 meter travel lanes to the NY 17 EB/I-81 SB overlap section. NY 17 EB has a 3. 0 meter paved right shoulder and a paved left shoulder that varies from 1.05 meters to 1.8 meters. On the approach to BIN 103118A, the NY 17 EB shoulders taper to 0.9 meters to match the shoulder width on the bridge. The horizontal alignment for NY 17 EB is curvilinear with two-291 meter radii reverse curves separated by a 67 meter tangent from west of Prospect Mountain to where NY 17 EB meets I-81 SB. The first 291 meter radius curve is a non-standard curve for the Interstate classification of the 3-lane section of NY 17 EB, but the second 291 meter radius curve does meet the standard for the direct connect ramp classification of the 2-lane section of NY 17 EB. In general the vertical alignment is considered rolling. West of the project area there is a 480 meter crest vertical curve with an entrance grade of +2.6% and an exit grade of –3.1%. There is also a 487 meter crest vertical curve near Mygatt Street followed by a non-standard 4.97% descending grade into the non-standard horizontal curve around Prospect Mountain. The remainder of the profile grades on NY 17 EB are less than 1% except for a short section on the approach to BIN 103118A which is +2.1%. At the diverge point from NY 17 EB, Ramp EA continues to the north to its merge point with I–81 NB with 2-3.6 meter travel lanes, a 1.2 meter paved left shoulder and a 2.4-3.0 meter paved right shoulder. The horizontal geometry of Ramp EA consists of two tangent sections and a 291 meter radius curve to the left where the roadway passes beneath BINs 1031181 and 103118B. There is a 177 meter sag vertical curve beneath these bridges with an entrance grade of –4.7% and an exit grade of +3.7%. The diverge from NY 17 EB and the merge to I-81 NB have flat grades of less than 0.5%. Ramp F is a tapered exit ramp that diverges from NY 17 EB approximately 340 meters prior to the Ramp EA/NY 17 EB diverge. There is approximately 60 meters of deceleration length from the point the ramp is 3.6 meters wide to the exit curve. The ramp consists of a 4.3 meter travel lane, a 1.2 meter paved left shoulder and a 3.0 meter paved right shoulder. The horizontal geometry consists of a tangent section to achieve the split from NY 17 EB, followed by a 226 meter radius curve to the left. There is a 37 meter radius curve to the right on the approach to the intersection with US 11. The Ramp F intersection with US 11 is not skewed. The Ramp F vertical alignment consists of a descending 4.3% grade from the end of the gore to the beginning of the 37 meter horizontal curve followed by a +0.83% grade on the approach to US 11.

II-9

In the westbound direction, NY 17 consists of 2-3.6 meter travel lanes from its diverge from I-81 NB to the merge with Ramp EB. There are 0.9 meter left and right shoulders on BIN 103118B that taper to a 1.05-1.8 meter paved left shoulder and a 3.0 meter paved right shoulder west of BIN 103118B. At the merge with Ramp EB, NY 17 WB consists of 4-3.6 meter travel lanes. The 4-3.6 meter travel lanes taper to 3-3.6 meter travel lanes as the roadway proceeds west around Prospect Mountain and the 3-3.6 meter travel lanes continue on NY 17 WB to the western project limit. The horizontal alignment for NY 17 WB is curvilinear with a 294 meter and 298 meter reverse curves separated by a 4 meter tangent section from the diverge with I-81 NB to west of Prospect Mountain. The 294 meter radius curve meets the standard for the direct connect ramp classification of the 2-lane section of NY 17 WB, but the 298 meter radius curve is a non-standard curve for the Interstate classification of the 3 and 4-lane section of NY 17 WB. NY 17 WB follows the same alignment as NY 17 EB from the west side of Prospect Mountain to the western project limit. In general the vertical alignment is considered rolling. The grades from the diverge with I-81 NB to the non-standard horizontal curve around Prospect Mountain vary to a maximum of 1.1%. At the curve around Prospect Mountain there is a +0.3% grade followed by a +3.2% grade. There is a 487 meter crest vertical curve near Mygatt Street followed by a 0.5% descending grade. West of Mygatt Street there is a 480 meter crest vertical curve with an entrance grade of +3.1% and an exit grade of –2.6%. Ramp EB from its diverge from I-81 SB to its merge with NY 17 WB consists of 2-3.6 meter travel lanes with a 1.2 meter paved left shoulder and a 3.0 meter paved right shoulder. The horizontal geometry of Ramp EB consists of two tangent sections with a 291 meter radius curve connecting them. The vertical alignment consists of flat grades of less than 0.5% at the diverge from I-81 SB and the merge with NY 17 WB with a grade of +3.9% on the interior portion of the ramp. The NY 17 WB off ramp to Mygatt Street consists of a 4.3 meter travel lane, a 1.2 meter paved left shoulder and a paved right shoulder that varies from 2.4 meters to 0.75 meters near the intersection with Mygatt Street. In the direction of travel, the horizontal geometry of the NY 17 WB off ramp consists of 405 meter radius reverse curves to the right and left to form the width for the 35 meter deceleration lane. A second set of 152 meter reverse curves separates the ramp from NY 17 WB. The ramp continues parallel to NY 17 WB on a tangent

section to its intersection with Mygatt Street which is skewed approximately 15° from perpendicular. The vertical alignment for the ramp consists of grades between 1.5% and 2.7% from its diverge from NY 17 WB through the interior portion of the ramp. On the approach to Mygatt Street, there are descending grades of 3.5% and 6.6% with a short sag vertical curve at the intersection with Mygatt Street.

The existing right-of-way along the NY 17 section varies in width from a

minimum of approximately 72 meters to a maximum of approximately 200 meters near the NY 17/I-81 Interchange. There is a 100 mm high traversable curb along the right shoulders of NY 17 EB and WB from the western project limit to the bridge over Mygatt Street (BIN 1063249). There is a paved median with concrete median barrier that is 2.81 meters wide from the western project limit to approximately 125 meters west of BIN 1062349. At this point the paved median tapers from the 2.81 meters to a width of approximately 7.0 meters where the concrete median barrier ends 110 meters east of BIN 1062349. From this point to the east, NY 17 EB and WB diverge horizontally and vertically and are separated by a grass sloped median that varies in width. There is no parking allowed along NY 17. The minimum clear zone along NY 17 and the direct connect Ramps EA and EB is 1.2 meters on the left of the roadways and 2.4-3.0 meters on the right of the roadways due to the presence of guide rail and light poles at the edge of the shoulder.

I-81 – In the northbound direction, I-81 consists of 2-3.6 meter travel lanes from

the diverge with NY 17 WB to the merge with Ramp EA. At the merge with Ramp EA there are 4-3.6 meter travel lanes that continue for approximately 120 meters where I-81 NB begins to taper to the 3-3.6 meter travel lanes that continue to the northern project limit. There are 0.9 meter shoulders on BIN 1031182 that taper to a 3.0 meter paved right shoulder and a 1.8 meter paved left shoulder. The horizontal geometry along I-81 NB in the direction of travel consists of a 291 meter radius curve to the right at the diverge from NY 17 WB followed by a tangent section that continues past the northern project limit. The vertical alignment for I-81 NB has relatively flat grades of less than 1.1% with the exception of the exit grade from the crest vertical curve on BIN 1031182 which is –4.0%.

In the southbound direction, I-81 consists of 3-3.6 meter travel lanes at the

northern project limit that taper to 4-3.6 meter travel lanes at the I-81 SB/Ramp EB diverge. South of the diverge, I-81 SB consists of 2-3.6 meter travel lanes to the point where it merges with NY 17 EB. I-81 SB

II-10

has a 1.8 meter paved left shoulder and a paved right shoulder that varies in width from 6.6 meters to 3.0 meters from the northern project limit to BIN 1031181 and 0.9 meter shoulders on BIN 1031181. The horizontal geometry along I-81 SB in the direction of travel consists of a tangent section from the northern project limit followed by a 291 meter radius curve to the left from the diverge with Ramp EB to the merge with NY 17 EB and a tangent section continuing to the overlap section. The vertical alignment is flat with grades less than 1.0%.

The existing right-of-way along this section of I-81 is over 300 meters wide, which

includes I-81 SB, I-81 NB and US 11. There are no curbs along this section of I-81. There is a grassed sloped median between I-81 NB and SB that varies to a minimum width of 41.5 meters at the northern project limit. There is no parking allowed along I-81. The minimum clear zone along I-81 NB and SB is 1.8 meters on the left of the roadways and 3.0 meters on the right of the roadways due to the presence of guide rail and light poles at the edge of the shoulder.

NY 17/I-81 Overlap – The NY 17 EB/I-81 SB overlap section consists of 4-3.6 meter travel lanes from the merge point of NY 17 EB and I-81 SB to just east of the bridge over Chenango Street (BIN 1013062). At this point the two outside lanes diverge to form the EB/SB collector/distributor (CD) road and NY 17 EB/I-81 SB continues with 2-3.6 meter travel lanes to the point where the EB/SB CD road merges. From this point, 3-3.6 meter travel lanes continue in the EB/SB direction to the eastern/southern project limit approximately 270 meters east of Broad Avenue. The EB/SB on ramp from Broad Avenue (Ramp BA) has a 195 meter long acceleration lane that is 3.6 meters wide and tapers to the existing three travel lanes just prior to the Bigelow Street overpass. The EB/SB CD road has a single through travel lane that varies in width to a minimum of 3.6 meters. There is a 3.6 meter deceleration lane for the EB/SB off ramp to NY 7 SB (Ramp CO) and a 3.6 meter acceleration/deceleration lane between the NY 7 SB off ramp to the EB/SB CD road (Ramp CI) and the EB/SB CD road off ramp to NY 7 NB (Ramp BI). Ramp BI and the EB/SB CD road on ramp from NY 7 NB (Ramp BO) merge on the EB/SB CD road just prior to forming the third NY 17 EB/I-81 SB travel lane. The NY 17 EB/I-81 SB overlap section has 0.9 meter left and right shoulders on BIN 1031181 and a 0.3 meter left shoulder on BIN 1013061. Between these two bridges the paved left shoulder varies from to 3.0 meters to 0.6 meters and the paved right shoulder varies from 3.6 meters down to 0.3 meters on BIN 1013061. East of BIN 1013061, the left shoulder varies from 4.5 meters to 0.8 meters where the EB/SB lanes begin to parallel the NB/WB lanes across the viaduct (BIN 1013072). East of BIN 1013072 the left shoulder varies from 0.915 meters to 1.1 meters at the eastern/southern project limit. The paved right shoulder along NY 17 EB/I-81 SB varies in width from 5.5 meters at the beginning of the concrete barrier separating the EB/SB mainline and the EB/SB CD road to 3.0 meters at the end of the concrete barrier between the two roadways. The right shoulder over the remainder of BIN 1013072 through the three lane section east of Interchange 4 is 0.8 meters, this tapers to the 3.0 meter paved right shoulder east of the viaduct that continues to the project limit. The paved left shoulder of the EB/SB CD road has a width of 0.6 meters. The paved right shoulder along the EB/SB CD road tapers to 3.0 meters east of BIN 1013061 and continues at this width to where Ramp CO diverges. The paved right shoulder width varies from 7.0 meters to 3.9 meters between Ramps CO and CI, varies between 0.6 meters and 1.2 meters along the acceleration/deceleration lane between Ramps CI and BI, and varies between 3.9 meters and 2.4 meters between Ramps BI and BO. The horizontal geometry of NY 17 EB/I-81 SB is fairly linear consisting of tangent sections and two horizontal curves with radii of 1746 meters to the left, across and east of BIN 1013061, and 3483 meters to the right on BIN 1013072. A tangent section continues over the viaduct to approximately 250 meters east of Broad Avenue where there is a non-standard 437 meter radius curve to the right followed by a tangent section east/south of the project limit. In general the vertical alignment is considered rolling. From BIN 1031181 to approximately 300 meters east of Broad Avenue there are descending and ascending grades between 1.2% and 2.0%. East of Broad Avenue, there is a +4.0% grade that continues east/south of the project limit. The EB/SB CD road follows the same general horizontal and vertical alignment as the mainline roadway. There is a variable width median with concrete median barrier separating NY 17 EB/I-81 SB and the EB/SB CD road.

In the direction of travel, the NY 17 WB/I-81 NB overlap section consists of 3-3.6 meter travel lanes from the eastern/southern project limit to the diverge point for the WB/NB CD road. At this point the outside lane diverges to form the WB/NB CD road and NY 17 WB/I-81 NB continues with 2-3.6 meter travel lanes to the point where the WB/NB CD road merges approximately 60 meters east of

II-11

Chenango Street. From this point, there are 3-3.6 meter travel lanes that taper to 4-3.6 meter travel lanes at the NY 17 WB/I-81 NB split on BIN 1031182. The WB/NB off ramp to Broad Avenue (Ramp BB) has a 50 meter long deceleration lane that is 3.6 meters wide and tapers from the existing 3 travel lanes just west of the Bigelow Street overpass. The WB/NB CD road has a single through travel lane that varies in width to a minimum of 3.6 meters. There is a 3.6 meter deceleration lane for the WB/NB CD road off ramp to NY 7 NB (Ramp AO) and a 3.6 meter acceleration/deceleration lane between the NY 7 NB off ramp to the WB/NB CD road (Ramp AI) and the WB/NB CD road off ramp to NY 7 SB (Ramp DI). Ramp DI and the WB/NB CD road on ramp from NY 7 SB (Ramp DO) merge on the WB/NB CD road just prior to forming the third NY 17 WB/I-81 NB travel lane. The NY 17 WB/I-81 NB overlap section has a 3.0 meter paved right shoulder at the eastern/southern project limit that tapers to the 0.8 meter right shoulder on BIN 1013071. The right shoulder along NY 17 WB/I-81 NB varies in width from 4.9 meters at the beginning of the concrete barrier separating the WB/NB mainline and the WB/NB CD road to 3.0 meters at the end of the concrete barrier between the two roadways. From the point where the WB/NB CD road merges to BIN 1031182, the paved right shoulder width varies to a minimum of 3.0 meters and then tapers to the 0.9 meter shoulder on BIN 1031182. The paved left shoulder on NY 17 WB/I-81 SB is approximately 1.1 meters at the eastern/southern project limit and tapers to the 0.8 meter left shoulder on BIN 1013071. West of BIN 1013071 the left shoulder tapers to 0.915 meters and continues at this width to a point just west of BIN 1013062 where it tapers to 3.6 meters. On the approach to BIN 1031182 the left shoulder tapers from 3.6 meters to 0.9 meters to match the shoulder width on the bridge. The paved left shoulder of the WB/NB CD road varies in width to a minimum of 0.6 meters. The paved right shoulder along the WB/NB CD road is 0.8 meters to where Ramp AO diverges from the CD road and also between the loop Ramps AI and DI. It varies from 5.0 meters to 3.0 meters between Ramps AO and AI and varies from 4.7 meters to 2.3 meters between Ramps DI and DO. In the direction of travel, the horizontal geometry of NY 17 WB/I-81 NB is fairly linear consisting of a tangent section east/south of the project limit followed by a non-standard 437 meter radius curve to the left just east of Broad Avenue. From Broad Avenue to the west, there are tangent sections connected by two horizontal curves with radii of 3493 meters to the left on BIN 1013071 and 699 meters to the right across BIN 1013062. In general the vertical alignment is considered rolling. In the direction of travel, there is a -4.0% grade east/south of the project limit to just east of Broad Avenue. From east of Broad Avenue to BIN 1031182 there are descending and ascending grades between 1.2% and 2.0%. The WB/NB CD road follows the same general horizontal and vertical alignment as the mainline roadway. There is a variable width median with concrete median barrier separating NY 17 WB/I-81 NB and the WB/NB CD road.

The roadway sections of the ramps at Interchange 4 consist of 4.9 meter travel

lanes with a 2.0 meter paved right shoulder and 1.07 meter paved left shoulder in the direction of travel. Ramp DO has an auxiliary lane for traffic from Bevier Street that varies in width from 4.2 meters to 0.0 meters on the approach to the WB/NB CD road. The bridge sections of the ramps at Interchange 4 consist of 4.9 meter travel lanes with a 0.6 meter right and left shoulders. The horizontal geometry for Ramp AO consists of a series of reverse curves with short tangents separating them. In the direction of travel, the radii for the Ramp AO curves are 45.72 meters to the right, 60.96 meters to the left and 60.96 meters to the right. The vertical alignment consists of flat grades at the ramp terminals and grades of –2.9% and –4.9% on the interior of the ramp. The horizontal geometry for the loop Ramp AI, in the direction of travel, consists of a compound curve to the right with radii of 54.86 meters and 45.72 meters followed by a short tangent and a 45.72 meter curve to the right at the merge with the WB/NB CD road. The vertical alignment consists of flat grades at the ramp terminals and a grade of +5.0% on the interior of the ramp. The horizontal geometry for Ramp BO consists of a compound curve at the diverge from NY 7 NB followed by a series of reverse curves with short tangents separating them. In the direction of travel, the radii for the Ramp BO compound curves are 388.1 meters and 54.86 meters to the right at the diverge from NY 7 NB, 61.57 meters to the left and 54.86 meters to the right at the merge with the EB/SB CD road. The vertical alignment consists of flat grades at the ramp terminals and grades of +3.7% and +3.3% on the interior of the ramp. The horizontal geometry for loop Ramp BI, in the direction of travel, consists of a compound curve to the right with radii of 45.72 meters and 54.86 meters. The vertical alignment consists of flat grades at the ramp terminals and a grade of –4.6% on the interior of the ramp. The horizontal geometry for Ramp CO consists of a series of reverse curves with short tangents separating them. In the direction of travel, the radii for the Ramp CO curves are 45.72 meters to the right, 64.62 meters to the left and 54.86 meters to the right at the merge with NY 7 SB. The vertical alignment consists of a -1.65% grade at the diverge from the EB/SB CD road followed by a -2.7% grade on the interior of the ramp and a flat grade of

II-12

less than 1.0% at the merge with NY 7 SB. The loop Ramp CI horizontal geometry, in the direction of travel, consists of a broken back curve to the right with both curves having radii of 45.72 meters. The vertical alignment consists of flat grades at the ramp terminals and grades of –1.6% and +2.8% on the interior of the ramp. The horizontal geometry for Ramp DO consists of a series of reverse curves with short tangents separating them. In the direction of travel, the radii for the Ramp DO curves are 54.86 meters to the right at the diverge from NY 7 SB, 75.29 meters to the left and 54.86 meters to the right at the merge with the WB/NB CD road. The vertical alignment consists of flat grades at the ramp terminals and grades between +1.0% and +3.0% on the interior of the ramp. The horizontal geometry for loop Ramp DI, in the direction of travel, consists of a compound curve to the right with radii of 45.72 meters and 56.39 meters. The vertical alignment consists of flat grades at the ramp terminals and grades of –4.9% and –2.1% on the interior of the ramp. There is a 150 meter long acceleration/deceleration lane on the EB/SB CD road between the Ramp CI merge and the Ramp BI diverge. There is no acceleration lane for the Ramp BO merge with the EB/SB CD road, the existing configuration requires Ramp BO traffic to yield to the EB/SB CD road traffic. The WB/NB CD road has a 40 meter long deceleration lane for the Ramp AO diverge, a 150 meter long acceleration/deceleration lane between Ramps AI and DI and there is no acceleration lane for the Ramp DO merge with the CD road. Ramp DO traffic is required to yield to traffic on the WB/NB CD road.

The roadway section for the two ramps at Interchange 3 consists of a 5.5 meter

travel lane with a 3.0 meter paved right shoulder and a 1.2 meter paved left shoulder that sit behind mountable concrete curb. In the direction of travel, the horizontal geometry of Ramp BA consists of a 75.929 meter curve to the right, just east of the intersection with Broad Avenue, followed by a tangent section and a 291 meter curve to the right at the merge with NY 17 EB/I-81 SB. In the direction of travel, the vertical geometry consists of a –2.0% grade leaving Broad Avenue followed by grades of +3.9%, +1.1% and +4.2% at the merge with NY 17 EB/I-81 SB. The horizontal geometry of Ramp BB consists of a 447 meter curve to the left at the diverge from NY 17 WB/I-81 NB followed by a tangent section and a 582 meter curve to the left on the approach to Broad Avenue. The vertical alignment consists of a –3.6% grade at the diverge from NY 17 WB/I-81 SB followed by grades of –2.7%, -4.8% and -2.5% on the approach to Broad Avenue. Ramp BA intersects Broad Avenue approximately 80 meters south of BIN 1013072 at a 38º skew from perpendicular. Ramp BB intersects Broad Avenue approximately 30 meters north of BIN 1013071 at a 6º skew from perpendicular.

The existing right-of-way along the NY 17/I-81 overlap section between the

Chenango River and Interchange 4 varies in width from a minimum of approximately 71 meters near Chenango Street to a maximum of approximately 158 meters near the Chenango River. At Interchange 4 the right-of-way width is approximately 350 meters and east of Interchange 4, the right-of-way width varies between a minimum of approximately 43 meters to a maximum of approximately 150 meters at Interchange 3. There is non-mountable, concrete bridge curb on the Ramp AI bridge (BIN 101307A) and the Ramp BO bridge (BIN 101307C), and the only other curb in this section of the project is the mountable concrete curb along the travel way of Ramps BA and BB. There is a sloped grass median separating NY 17 EB/I-81 SB and NY 17 WB/I-81 NB from the east end of BINs 1031181 and 1031182 over the Chenango River to the west end of BINs 1013061 and 1013062 over Chenango Street that varies in width from approximately 52 meters to 8.4 meters. East of the Chenango Street bridges there is a paved median that varies in width from 6.85 meters at Chenango Street to 2.4 meters approximately 85 meters east of Chenango Street. The 2.4 meter paved median continues across the viaduct to just east/south of Broad Avenue where it tapers to a 4.9 meter paved median that continues east/south of the project limit. There is no parking allowed along the NY 17/I-81 overlap section or any of the ramps within the overlap section. The minimum clear zone is the same as the shoulder width for all of the roadways within the overlap section as there is guide rail, median barrier and light poles located at the edge of the shoulder throughout this section.

Other roadways in the project area that may be impacted by the proposed alternative include US 11 (Front Street), NY 7, NY 363, Prospect Street, LaGrange Street, Mygatt Street, Chenango Street and Broad Avenue. US 11 from approximately 130 meters south of Franklin Street to Prospect Street consists of a single variable width travel lane in each direction with the northbound travel lane tapering to 2-3.6 meter travel lanes on the approach to Prospect Street. There is no shoulder along the southbound lane and there is a 0.8 meter shoulder along the northbound lane. There is also a floodwall that runs adjacent to the northbound travel lane from just south of Franklin Street to Prospect Street. US 11

II-13

between its intersection with Prospect Street on the south and Bevier Street on the north consists of 2-3.6 meter travel lanes in each direction with 1.8 meter paved shoulders. There is non-mountable curb along the southbound lane that begins at the Prospect Street intersection and continues south into the city. The horizontal alignment consists of a 158 meter horizontal curve to the left approximately 110 meters south of the Franklin Street intersection followed by a tangent section and 1000 meter reverse curves between Franklin Street and Prospect Street. A tangent section continues north to a 661.5 meter horizontal curve to the left at the NY 17 EB bridge over US 11. This is followed by another tangent section, an 847 meter horizontal curve to the right and a tangent section that continues north past the Bevier Street intersection. The vertical alignment, from south to north, consists of a flat grade of approximately -0.01% from the southern work limit to just south of Franklin Street, then a +4.0% grade followed by –1.9% grade that is connected by a 185 meter vertical curve that does not provide standard stopping sight distance. The remainder of the grades are relatively flat with none greater than 0.8%. The right-of-way width along US 11 south of Prospect Street varies from a minimum of approximately 14 meters to a maximum of 23 meters. US 11, north of Prospect Street is within the highway boundary of NY 17 and I-81. US 11 intersects Franklin Street, Prospect Street, Ramp F and Bevier Street in the project area. The Franklin

Street intersection is skewed approximately 31° from perpendicular. None of the other intersections are skewed, although there are sharp horizontal curves on the Prospect Street and Ramp F approaches to US 11. US 11 has a southbound right turn lane at Prospect Street, a southbound left turn lane at Bevier Street, and a northbound right turn lane at Bevier Street. There is no parking allowed along this section of US 11. There are 4 commercial driveways along US 11, south of Franklin Street. There are no other driveways along US 11. The clear zone, south of the Prospect Street, is approximately 0.8 meters due to the floodwall and utility poles adjacent to the roadway and for the remainder of US 11 to the north it is 2.4 meters as there is corrugated beam guide rail along both sides of US 11.

NY 7 in the northbound direction, from its intersection with Frederick Street to Ramp BO, consists of 3-3.6 meter travel lanes and a 2.4 meter paved right shoulder. The outside travel lane becomes a deceleration lane for Ramp BO. North of Ramp BO there are 2-3.6 meter travel lanes on NY 7 NB with a 2.4 meter paved right shoulder. There is a 3.6 meter acceleration/deceleration lane between Ramps BI and AI. The paved right shoulder tapers to 0.9 meters beneath the NY 17/I-81 bridges over NY 7 due to a pier located at the edge of the shoulder. There is also a tapered off ramp terminal just north of Ramp AI for NY 7 NB traffic to access Bevier Street. In the southbound direction NY 7 consists of 2-3.6 meter travel lanes from the Bevier Street overpass to the merge with Ramp CO. There is a 3.6 meter acceleration/deceleration lane between the NY 7 SB on ramp from Bevier Street and Ramp DO and also between Ramps DI and CI. South of the Ramp CO merge NY 7 SB consists of 3-3.6 meter travel lanes that taper to 4-3.6 meter travel lanes with the fourth lane becoming a right turn lane at the Frederick Street intersection. South of the Frederick Street intersection the two inside travel lanes continue to the south and the roadway becomes NY 363 which continues into the city of Binghamton. The outside travel lane diverges from NY 363 and continues as NY 7 SB with a 4.6 meter travel lane that passes beneath NY 363 and continues to Robinson Street. NY 7 SB has a 2.4 meter paved right shoulder except where it crosses beneath the NY 17/I-81 bridges where it tapers to 0.9 meters due to a pier located at the edge of shoulder. The 2.4 meter paved right shoulder tapers to a 2.0 meter paved right shoulder where NY 7 SB diverges from NY 363. NY 7 NB prior to the merge with NY 363 consists of a single travel lane that varies in width from approximately 4.5 meters to 3.6 meters at the merge with NY 363, it also has a 2.0 meter paved right shoulder and a 1.0 meter paved left shoulder. NY 363 has a 2.4 meter paved right shoulder that tapers to a 0.9 meter paved right shoulder. NY 7 has a paved median with concrete barrier that varies in width from 2.74 meters to 6.1 meters. South of Frederick Street, the 2.74 meter median tapers to a 0.75 meter median with concrete barrier along NY 363. There is mountable concrete curb along the NY 7 NB right shoulder from the intersection with Frederick Street to where Ramp BO begins to diverge. The horizontal alignment for NY 363 and NY 7 consists of a tangent section at the southern project limit followed by a 776 meter radius curve to the left and a tangent section on the approach to Frederick Street. There is a 776 meter radius curve to the right just north of Frederick Street followed by a tangent section that continues north over the Bevier Street overpass. NY 7 SB at its diverge from NY 363 consists of a compound curve to the right with radii of 537 meters and 388 meters followed by a 57 meter tangent section and a 76.2 meter curve to the left before it passes beneath NY 363. NY 7 NB, prior to its merge with NY 363, consists of a tangent section followed by a 776 meter curve to the right and a tangent section at its merge with NY 363. The vertical alignment of NY 363 consists of descending grades of 2.0% at the southern project limit followed by a -2.9% grade where NY 363 ends and NY 7 begins. There is a 145

II-14

meter sag vertical curve at the Frederick Street intersection. The NY 7 vertical alignment north of Frederick Street consists of flat grades between 0.35% and 1.5%. The vertical alignment for NY 7 SB after it diverges from NY 363 consists of flat grades of less than 1.83%. The vertical alignment for NY 7 NB prior to the merge with NY 363 consists of a -0.4% grade leaving Robinson Street followed by an ascending grade of 2.5% and a descending grade of -2.9% at the merge with NY 363. The right-of-way width for NY 363 and NY 7 NB and SB south of Frederick Street varies from a minimum of approximately 55 meters to a maximum of 97 meters. North of Frederick Street the right-of-way width along NY 7 is approximately 55 meters up to Interchange 4 and varies to a minimum of approximately 66 meters north of Interchange 4. The right-of-way width within Interchange 4 is approximately 350 meters. Frederick Street intersects NY 7 approximately 450 meters south of the NY 17/I-81 overlap section at a skew of 5º from perpendicular. The turning movements at this intersection are restricted to through movements on NY 7, right turns on all four approaches, and eastbound left turns from Frederick Street west of NY 7. There is no parking allowed along this section of NY 7 and there are no driveways in this section either. The minimum clear zone along NY 363 and NY 7 is the same as the width of the shoulder due to the presence of guide rail, signs and light poles at the edge of shoulder.

Prospect Street, from west of the Spring Forest Cemetery to US 11, consists of a

3.3 to 3.6 meter travel lane in each direction. The south side of Prospect Street has a 0.6 meter offset to non-mountable concrete curb. The north side of Prospect Street has a 0.6 meter offset to non-mountable curb from west of Spring Forest Cemetery to Karlada Drive and a 1.2 meter asphalt or concrete gutter from Karlada Drive to approximately 100 meters west of the US 11 intersection. The horizontal alignment from west of Spring Forest Cemetery to Mygatt Street consists of a two tangent sections connected by a 3000 meter radius curve to the left followed by a 400 meter radius curve to the right just prior to the Mygatt Street intersection. From the Mygatt Street intersection to the east the horizontal alignment consists of three tangent sections with flat horizontal curves at the intersections with Brownell Avenue and Oak Street. There is a 436 meter horizontal curve to the left that closely parallels NY 17 EB around Prospect Mountain and a 90 meter curve to the right on the approach to the US 11 intersection. The vertical alignment is rolling with short sag vertical curves just west and east of Mygatt Street. From west to east there are grades of -2.0%, -1.6%, -0.9%, 6.4%, -2.8%, -1.3%, -0.7%, -2.7%, 0.4%, 4.3%, -0.6%, -2.6%, -6.1%, -4.0%, -7.0%, -0.6% -5.5% and 3.0% on the approach to US 11. The tangent sections are connected by vertical curves with lengths between 30 meters and 150 meters. The right-of-way width west of Mygatt Street varies from a minimum of 13.1 meters to approximately 16.5 meters just west of Mygatt Street. The right-of-way width from Mygatt Street to Karlada Drive is approximately 15.1 meters. From Karlada Drive to the US 11 intersection, Prospect Street is within the NY 17 highway boundary. There are 5 city of Binghamton streets that intersect the south side of Prospect Street between Mygatt Street and the US 11 intersection. These streets are Maple Street, Brownell Avenue, Oak Street, Markay Court and Karlada Drive and they all intersect Prospect Street at an approximately 21º skew from perpendicular. Parking is allowed on the south side of Prospect Street from Spring Forest Cemetery to the west. Parking is not allowed along either side of Prospect Street for the remainder of its length to US 11. There is a 1.525 meter concrete sidewalk on the south side of Prospect Street with a varying width snow storage area from west of Spring Forest Cemetery to Karlada Drive and no snow storage area from Karlada Drive to the US 11 intersection. There are no bus stops on this section of Prospect Street. There are numerous residential driveways along the south side of Prospect Street west of Spring Forest Cemetery. There are twelve residential driveways along the south side of Prospect Street between Mygatt Street and Karlada Drive. The existing clear zone varies throughout the length due to utility poles, guide rail and fence adjacent to the roadway.

LaGrange Street consists of a 3.3 meter travel lane in each direction with a 0.3

meter offset to non-mountable concrete curb on the south side and a 0.3 meter offset to non-mountable concrete curb or paved gutter on the north side. The horizontal alignment consists of a 1709 meter curve to the right just east of the residential houses at the western work limit followed by a tangent section and a 765 meter curve to the left on the approach to Mygatt Street. The vertical alignment is rolling with a sag vertical curve at the bottom of an 8.3% grade at the western work limit and a crest vertical curve followed by a –7.6% grade on its approach to the intersection with Mygatt Street. The right-of-way width within the limits of work varies between a minimum of 13.3 meters to a maximum of 28.8 meters. There are no signs regulating parking on LaGrange Street. There are six driveways along the north side of LaGrange Street

II-15

within the work limits. The existing clear zone varies throughout the length due to utility poles, guide rail and fence adjacent to the roadway.

Mygatt Street consists of a 3.3 meter travel lane in each direction with a 0.6 meter offset to non-mountable concrete curb. The horizontal alignment is straight and the vertical alignment consists of grades between 10% and 15% from the intersection with Prospect Street to the intersection with LaGrange Street. The right-of-way is approximately 13 meters wide beneath the NY 17 bridge. Mygatt Street intersects LaGrange Street and Ridge Street at its north end, the NY 17 WB Off ramp just north of NY 17 and Prospect Street just south of NY 17 at a signalized intersection. The Prospect Street intersection

is skewed approximately 15° from perpendicular. Parking is not allowed along either side of this section of Mygatt Street nor are there any driveways entering Mygatt Street in this section. There are 1.525 meter concrete sidewalks on both sides of Mygatt Street that end where the sidewalks intersect LaGrange Street and Packard Street. There are no bus stops on this section of Mygatt Street. The existing clear zone varies throughout this section of Mygatt Street due to utility poles and fence adjacent to the roadway.

Chenango Street consists of a 3.6 meter travel lane in each direction with a 2.0

meter offset to non-mountable concrete curb. The horizontal alignment is straight and the vertical alignment consists of a 30 meter sag vertical curve beneath NY 17/I-81 with grades of –0.6% and +0.6%. The right-of-way is approximately 15.5 meters wide beyond the limits of the NY 17/I-81 highway boundary. Truesdell Street and Moffatt Avenue intersect Chenango Street approximately 65 meters south of NY 17/I-81 at skews of 1º and 12º from perpendicular respectively. Sturges Street intersects Chenango Street approximately 60 meters north of NY 17/I-81 at a 10º skew from perpendicular. There are no signs restricting parking along either side of Chenango Street. There are two residential driveways and 1 commercial driveway on the east side of Chenango Street and there is 1 residential and two commercial driveways on the west side between Moffatt Avenue and Sturges Street. There are 1.525 meter concrete sidewalks with 0.75 meter snow storage areas on both sides of Chenango Street. There are bus stops on the east side of Chenango Street at the intersections with Moffatt Avenue and Sturges Street and on the west side of Chenango Street at the intersections with Cary Street and Truesdell Street. The existing clear zone varies throughout this section of Chenango Street due to utility poles and signs adjacent to the roadway.

Broad Avenue consists of a 2-3.6 meter travel lanes in each direction with a 0.3

meter offset to non-mountable concrete curb. The horizontal alignment is straight and the vertical alignment consists of flat grades of less than 1.0%. The right-of-way is approximately 25 meters wide. Ramps BA intersects Broad Avenue approximately 80 meters south of NY 17/I-81 at a skew of 38º and Ramp BB intersects Broad Avenue approximately 30 meters north of NY 17/I-81 at a skew of 6º. There are no signs restricting parking along the west side Broad Avenue and there are no standing signs along the east side of Broad Avenue. There are no driveways that intersect Broad Avenue within the limits of the ramp intersections. There is a 1.525 meter concrete sidewalk with 2.5 meter snow storage area on the east side of Broad Avenue. There is a bus stop on the east side of Broad Avenue just north of the Ramp BB intersection. There is a bus stop on the west side of Broad Avenue at the Agway across from the intersection with Hill Street just north of the Ramp BB intersection. The existing clear zone varies throughout this section of Broad Avenue due to utility poles and signs adjacent to the roadway.

C.1.f. Abutting Highway Segments and Future Plans for Abutting Highway Sections

NY 17 – NY 17 west of the project limit consists of 3-3.6 meter travel lanes in

each direction, with 1.05 meter left shoulders and 3.0 meter right shoulders. The 1.05 meter left shoulders are included in the 2.81 meter paved median separating NY 17 EB and WB. The horizontal and vertical alignment is curvilinear in nature with numerous horizontal and vertical curves west of the project area. Interchange 71 is located approximately 2.2 kilometers west of the project limit. The existing pavement is in good condition as it was recently rehabilitated from NY 26 to the Mygatt Street bridge under PIN 9066.49, which was completed in 2001. There are no other plans to rehabilitate or widen NY 17 west of the project area. The speed limit immediately west of the project area is 55 mph. The speed limit increases to 65 mph on NY 17 west of Interchange 69.

I-81 – I-81 north of the project area consists of 3-3.6 meter travel lanes in each

direction with 1.8 meter left shoulders and 3.0 meter right shoulders. The horizontal and vertical alignment

II-16

is curvilinear in nature with numerous horizontal and vertical curves north of the project area. Interchange 5 is located approximately 0.5 kilometers north of the project limit. The pavement is in good condition as a rehabilitation of the pavement between Interchange 4 and Interchange 6 was completed in 1997 under PIN 9500.63. There are no other plans to rehabilitate or widen I-81 north of the project area within the next 20 years. The speed limit immediately north of the project area is 55 mph. The speed limit increases to 65 mph on I-81 north of Interchange 6.

NY 17/I-81 Overlap Section – The NY 17/I-81 overlap section east/south of the

project area consists of 3-3.6 meter travel lanes in each direction, with 2.1 meter left shoulders and 3.0 meter right shoulders. The 2.1 meter left shoulders are included in the 4.9 meter paved median separating the NY 17 EB/I-81 SB and NY 17 WB/I-81 NB roadways. The horizontal and vertical alignment is curvilinear in nature with numerous horizontal and vertical curves east/south of the project area. PIN 9500.65 will rehabilitate or reconstruct the NY 17/I-81 overlap section from Broad Avenue to the end of the overlap in Five Mile Point. The letting for PIN 9500.65 is scheduled for 2012. There are no other plans to widen NY 17/I-81 east/south of the project area. The pavement through this section is in good condition as an interim project, PIN 9500.89, to address pavement surface deterioration was recently completed. This project consisted of milling and resurfacing of the pavement and stone and oil treatment of the shoulders. The speed limit immediately east/south of the project area is 55 mph. The speed limit changes to 65 mph on the NY 17/I-81 overlap section at the Binghamton City Line, which is approximately 2.5 kilometers east of the project area.

C.1.g. Speeds and Delay

(1) Existing Speed Limits – the existing posted statutory speed limit on NY 17

and I-81 within the project area is 55 mph (90 km/h). There are 50 mph curve warning signs posted on the NY 17 EB approach to the NY 17/I-81 Interchange. The off ramps in the project area have various posted warning speeds prior to their exit curves. US 11 has a posted statutory speed limit of 55 mph (90 km/h) north of the Ramp F intersection and a posted regulatory speed limit of 30 mph (50 km/h) south of the ramp intersection. The posted regulatory speed limit on NY 363 and NY 7 is 55 mph (90 km/h). LaGrange Street, Mygatt Street, Prospect Street, Chenango Street and Broad Avenue have posted regulatory speed limits of 30 mph (50 km/h).

(2) Operating Speeds – The 85th percentile speed for this project is 110 km/h. Refer to the September 14, 1994 memorandum in Appendix A from the Design Quality Assurance Bureau for the 85th percentile speed determination.

(3) Travel Time and Delay Estimates – Travel time and delay results for existing and future no-build conditions are not applicable, as there are no delays due to congestion now, nor are there any expected in the design year.

C.1.h. Traffic Volumes

The existing and ETC traffic volumes for the no-build condition for NY 17, I-81

and the NY 17/I-81 overlap are presented in the following Table II-1 and are also shown on the traffic flow diagrams in Appendix B.

Table II-1 – No-Build Present and Projected Traffic Volumes

YEAR NY 17 I - 81

NY 17/I–81

Overlap

(West of Int. 4)

NY 17/I–81

Overlap

(East of Int. 4)

AADT 67,000 57,000 67,000 49,000

DHV (two-way) 7,350 5,990 6,760 4,930

DDHV (one-way) 3,700 3,040 3,600 2,485

2002

% Trucks 10.0 15.0 12.0 12.0

AADT 94,000 76,000 92,000 69,000

2041 DHV (two-way) 10,250 7,970 9,200 6,960

II-17

DDHV (one-way) 5,150 4,160 5,090 3,680 (ETC + 30)

% Trucks 10.0 15.0 12.0 12.0

AADT – Average Annual Daily Traffic (Two-Way) DHV – Design Hourly Volume (Two – Way) DDHV – Directional Design Hourly Volume (One-Way) ETC – Estimated Time of Completion

The Future No-Build Year of 2041 was selected in accordance with the NYSDOT

Design Traffic Forecast Policy for reconstruction projects that involve new and reconstructed bridges and corresponds to an estimated time of completion plus 30 years (ETC+30).

NY 17 and I-81 are both on the National Highway System (NHS). The truck

volumes are estimated to be 10 % on NY 17 west of the overlap section, 15% on I-81 north of the overlap section and 12% on the NY 17/I-81 overlap section. The truck volumes on the ramps are estimated at 6%.

Existing through and turning volumes were established by NYSDOT Planning in

March 2002 for the major routes, ramps and intersections throughout the project area. The existing and future no-build Year 2041 traffic volumes are shown on the traffic flow diagrams in Appendix B of this report.

C.1.i. Level of Service

The 2000 Highway Capacity Manual’s Level of Service (LOS) methodology

presents a standard procedure for analyzing freeway segments, weave segments and ramp junctions. These roadway components were analyzed using Highway Capacity Software 2000, which is based on this methodology. The findings for existing condition LOS for years 2002 and 2041 at the various roadway components are summarized in Appendix B. As shown in the analysis results, several locations are currently operating at or below the minimum Level of Service D during the years 2002 and 2041. As stated in the design criteria, LOS D is the minimum acceptable for interstates or freeways in heavily developed sections of metropolitan areas. The Level of Service analysis calculations for existing conditions in year 2002 and year 2041 are included in the separate Traffic Analysis Technical Appendix. The following roadway components are at or below the minimum LOS criteria using 2002 and 2041 traffic volumes:

• NY 17 WB 3-lane freeway segment west of Mygatt Street has a LOS D during the PM peak hour in the year 2041.

• NY 17 WB 3-lane freeway segment between the Ramp EB merge and the NY 17 WB off ramp to Mygatt Street has a LOS D during the PM peak hour in the year 2041.

• NY 17 WB 2-lane freeway segment between the I-81 NB diverge and the Ramp EB merge has a LOS D during the PM peak hour in the year 2041.

• NY 17 EB 3-lane freeway segment west of Mygatt Street has a LOS D during the AM and PM peak hour in the year 2041.

• NY 17 EB 3-lane freeway segment between the Ramp F diverge and the Ramp EA diverge has a LOS D during the PM peak hour in the year 2041.

• NY 17 WB/I-81 NB 2-lane freeway segment between the diverge and merge for the WB/NB CD road has a LOS D during the PM peak hour in the year 2041.

• NY 17 WB off ramp to Mygatt Street has a ramp junction LOS D and E during the AM and PM peak hour, respectively, in the year 2002 and a LOS F during the AM and PM peak hour in the year 2041.

• NY 17 EB off ramp to US 11 (Ramp F) has a ramp junction LOS D during the PM peak hour in the year 2002 and a LOS F during the AM and PM peak hour in the year 2041.

• NY 17 WB/I-81 NB off ramp to the WB/NB CD road has a ramp junction LOS D during the PM peak hour in the year 2041.

• I-81 NB off ramp to US 11 at Interchange 5 has a ramp junction LOS D during the PM peak hour in the year 2041.

II-18

• NY 17 WB/I-81 NB weave segment from the merge with the WB/NB CD road to the diverge between NY 17 WB and I-81 NB has a LOS D and E during the AM and PM peak hour, respectively, in the year 2041.

• WB/NB CD road weave segment within the Interchange 4 loop ramps has a LOS E during the PM peak hour in the year 2002 and LOS E and F during the AM and PM peak hour, respectively, in the year 2041. The weaving segment is under constrained operation during the AM and PM peak hour for both the year 2002 and year 2041. Constrained operation results in lower weaving speeds and higher non-weaving speeds.

• NY 17 EB/I-81 SB weave segment from the NY 17 EB and I-81 SB merge to the EB/SB CD road diverge meets the LOS criteria but it should be noted that for Type C weaving segments, the weaving ratio should not exceed 0.40. The weaving ratio during the AM peak hour under existing conditions is 0.39. At higher weaving ratios stable operations may still occur, but operations will be worse than those estimated by the methodology and breakdown may occur in some cases.

• NY 7 NB weave segment within the Interchange 4 loop ramps has a LOS D during the PM peak hour in the year 2002 and a LOS E during the PM peak hour in the year 2041. The weaving segment is under constrained operation during the AM and PM peak hour for both the year 2002 and year 2041.

The 2000 Highway Capacity Manual’s Level of Service (LOS) methodology also

presents a standard procedure for analyzing signalized intersections. The intersections on this project were analyzed using Synchro traffic software, which is based on this same signalized intersection capacity analysis methodology. The findings for existing LOS at the signalized intersections within the project limits are summarized in Table II-2 below. The Level of Service analysis calculations for existing conditions in year 2002 are included in the separate Traffic Analysis Technical Appendix. All of the intersections are currently operating as a whole, better than or meeting the desirable overall intersection LOS C for year 2002. There are four approaches that do not meet the minimum LOS C criteria, two of these approaches are at the Bevier Street interchange with NY 7 which is beyond the limits of the project. The first approach is the Prospect Street eastbound approach to US 11, which has a LOS D and an approach delay of 46 seconds during the PM peak hour. The second approach is the Frederick Street eastbound approach to NY 7, which has a LOS D and an approach delay of 35 seconds during the PM peak hour. The other two approaches are the Bevier Street eastbound approach to the NY 7 SB on ramp and State Street southbound approach to Bevier Street at this same intersection. The Bevier Street eastbound approach has a LOS D during both the AM and PM peak hour with an approach delay of 39 and 40 seconds during the AM and PM peak hour respectively. The State Street southbound approach has a LOS D during both the AM and PM peak hour with an approach delay of 41 and 50 seconds during the AM and PM peak hour respectively.

II-19

Table II-2 – Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis – Year 2002 Existing

SIGNALIZED

INTERSECTION YEAR 2002 – AM YEAR 2002 - PM

Overall LOS – B (18 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.72 Approaches

Overall LOS – C (24 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.84 Approaches

I-81 SB RAMPS/ US 11 (FRONT ST.) (INTERCHANGE 5) EB

B (14 secs.)

WB B

(17 secs.)

NB B

(18 secs.)

SB C

(21 secs.)

EB B

(14 secs.)

WB B

(18 secs.)

NB C

(24 secs.)

SB C

(25 secs.)

Overall LOS – A (7 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.56 Approaches

Overall LOS – A (7 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.59 Approaches

I-81 NB RAMPS/ US 11 (FRONT ST.) (INTERCHANGE 5) EB

-- (-- secs.)

WB A

(5 secs.)

NB A

(8 secs.)

SB A

(10 secs.)

EB --

(-- secs.)

WB A

(5 secs.)

NB A

(7 secs.)

SB A

(10 secs.) Overall LOS – B (12 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.60

Approaches Overall LOS – B (16 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.80

Approaches US 11 (FRONT ST.)/

BEVIER STREET EB --

(-- secs.)

WB B

(12 secs.)

NB A

(9 secs.)

SB B

(16 secs.)

EB --

(-- secs.)

WB B

(16 secs.)

NB B

(13 secs.)

SB C

(23 secs.)

Overall LOS–A (10 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.55 Approaches

Overall LOS – A (9 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.38 Approaches

MYGATT STREET / PROSPECT STREET

EB A

(8 secs.)

WB A

(9 secs.)

NB A

(6 secs.)

SB B

(12 secs.)

EB A

(10 secs.)

WB A

(10 secs.)

NB A

(7 secs.)

SB A

(8 secs.)

Overall LOS-A (9 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.69 Approaches

Overall LOS – B (13 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.85 Approaches

NY 17 EB OFF RAMP/ US 11 (FRONT ST.) INTERCHANGE 72

EB A

(7 secs.)

WB --

(-- secs.)

NB A

(1 secs.)

SB B

(18 secs.)

EB C

(22 secs.)

WB --

(-- secs.)

NB A

(1 secs.)

SB C

(25 secs.)

Overall LOS-B (13 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.69 Approaches

Overall LOS-B (20 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.85 Approaches

PROSPECT STREET/ US 11 (FRONT ST.)

EB C

(25 secs.)

WB --

(-- secs.)

NB B

(15 secs.)

SB B

(10 secs.)

EB

D

(46 secs.)

WB --

(-- secs.)

NB B

(19 secs.)

SB A

(5 secs.)

Overall LOS-A (8 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.65 Approaches

Overall LOS-B (13 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.75 Approaches

NY 7/ FREDERICK STREET

EB C

(25 secs.)

WB B

(14 secs.)

NB A

(5 secs.)

SB A

(8 secs.)

EB

D

(35 secs.)

WB B

(20 secs.)

NB B

(13 secs.)

SB A

(8 secs.)

Overall LOS-C (24 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.80 Approaches

Overall LOS-C (25 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.82 Approaches

BEVIER STREET/ NY 7 SB ON RAMP/

STATE STREET EB

D

(39 secs.)

WB A

(3 secs.)

NB --

(-- secs.)

SB

D

(41 secs.)

EB

D

(40 secs.)

WB A

(5 secs.)

NB --

(-- secs.)

SB

D

(50 secs.)

Overall LOS-B (13 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.80 Approaches

Overall LOS-B (19 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.82 Approaches

BEVIER STREET/ NY 7 NB OFF RAMP

EB A

(1 secs.)

WB B

(20 secs.)

NB B

(15 secs.)

SB --

(-- secs.)

EB A

(2 secs.)

WB C

(23 secs.)

NB C

(31 secs.)

SB --

(-- secs.)

The findings for future no-build LOS at the signalized intersections within the

project limits are summarized in Table II-3 below. The Level of Service analysis calculations for future no-build conditions in year 2041 are included in the separate Traffic Analysis Technical Appendix. Three of the signalized intersections do not meet the desirable overall intersection LOS C for the future no-build

II-20

year 2041 as shown in Table II-3 below. The US 11 intersection with the I-81 SB ramps at Interchange 5 has an overall LOS F during the PM peak hour with an overall delay of 88 seconds; the US 11 intersection with the NY 17 EB off ramp at Interchange 72 has an overall LOS D during the AM peak hour with an overall delay of 47 seconds; and the Bevier Street intersection with the NY 7 SB on ramp and State Street has an overall LOS D during the PM peak hour with an overall delay of 36 seconds. As shown in the table, in the design year 2041, there are numerous approaches that do not meet the desirable LOS C.

Table II-3 – Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis – Year 2041 No-Build

SIGNALIZED

INTERSECTION YEAR 2041 – AM YEAR 2041 – PM

Overall LOS – C (30 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.89 Approaches

Overall LOS – F (88 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.99

Approaches I-81 SB RAMPS/

US 11 (FRONT ST.) (INTERCHANGE 5) EB

C (24 secs.)

WB

D

(39 secs.)

NB C

(28 secs.)

SB C

(31 secs.)

EB

D

(40 secs.)

WB

E

(70 secs.)

NB

D

(51 secs.)

SB

F

(129 secs.)

Overall LOS – B (12 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.77 Approaches

Overall LOS – B (10 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.67 Approaches

I-81 NB RAMPS/ US 11 (FRONT ST.) (INTERCHANGE 5)

EB --

(-- secs.)

WB B

(11 secs.)

NB A

(10 secs.)

SB B

(15 secs.)

EB --

(-- secs.)

WB A

(8 secs.)

NB B

(10 secs.)

SB B

(13 secs.)

Overall LOS – B (15 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.75 Approaches

Overall LOS – C (21 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.83 Approaches

US 11 (FRONT ST.)/ BEVIER STREET

EB --

(-- secs.)

WB B

(13 secs.)

NB B

(12 secs.)

SB B

(19 secs.)

EB --

(-- secs.)

WB C

(22 secs.)

NB C

(21 secs.)

SB C

(22 secs.)

Overall LOS–B (11 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.65 Approaches

Overall LOS – B (10 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.57 Approaches

MYGATT STREET / PROSPECT STREET

EB A

(8 secs.)

WB A

(10 secs.)

NB A

(6 secs.)

SB B

(14 secs.)

EB A

(10 secs.)

WB B

(11 secs.)

NB A

(8 secs.)

SB B

(12 secs.)

Overall LOS-D (47 secs.) V/C = 1.00

Approaches Overall LOS – C (27 secs.) V/C = 1.05

Approaches

NY 17 EB OFF RAMP/ US 11 (FRONT ST.) INTERCHANGE 72 EB

E

(79 secs.)

WB --

(-- secs.)

NB A

(1 secs.)

SB B

(18 secs.)

EB

E

(65 secs.)

WB --

(-- secs.)

NB A

(4 secs.)

SB C

(23 secs.)

Overall LOS-C (27 secs.) V/C = 1.00 Approaches

Overall LOS-C (33 secs.) V/C = 1.05 Approaches

PROSPECT STREET/ US 11 (FRONT ST.)

EB

D

(40 secs.)

WB --

(-- secs.)

NB B

(14 secs.)

SB C

(27 secs.)

EB

F

(94 secs.)

WB --

(-- secs.)

NB C

(29 secs.)

SB A

(6 secs.)

Overall LOS-A (10 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.78 Approaches

Overall LOS-B (19 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.88 Approaches

NY 7/ FREDERICK STREET

EB

D

(46 secs.)

WB C

(23 secs.)

NB A

(6 secs.)

SB A

(10 secs.)

EB

D

(52 secs.)

WB C

(30 secs.)

NB B

(19 secs.)

SB B

(11 secs.)

Overall LOS-C (28 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.84 Approaches

Overall LOS-D (36 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.92

Approaches

BEVIER STREET/ NY 7 SB ON RAMP/

STATE STREET EB

D

(44 secs.)

WB A

(4 secs.)

NB --

(-- secs.)

SB

D

(45 secs.)

EB

E

(56 secs.)

WB A

(9 secs.)

NB --

(-- secs.)

SB

E

(72 secs.)

II-21

Table II-3 – Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis – Year 2041 No-Build

SIGNALIZED

INTERSECTION YEAR 2041 – AM YEAR 2041 – PM

Overall LOS-B (16 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.84 Approaches

Overall LOS-C (27 secs.) Max. V/C = 0.92 Approaches

BEVIER STREET/ NY 7 NB OFF RAMP

EB A

(2 secs.)

WB C

(25 secs.)

NB B

(19 secs.)

SB --

(-- secs.)

EB A

(2 secs.)

WB C

(31 secs.)

NB

D

(46 secs.)

SB --

(-- secs.)

These are also numerous approaches that have a lane group with LOS E or F and a

V/C approaching or greater than 0.95 for the future no-build year 2041 as shown in Table II-4 below. A V/C ratio of 1.0 indicates that the intersection lane group is at its maximum capacity.

Table II-4 – Individual Lane Groups – Year 2041 No-Build

( V/C Ratio approaching or greater than 0.95 and /or LOS E - F )

INTERSECTION

APPROACH

DIRECTION AND

LANE GROUP

TIME

PERIOD

LANE GROUP

LOS – V/C

I-81 SB RAMPS/ US 11 (FRONT ST.) (INTERCHANGE 5)

Westbound Thru/Left PM F – 0.96

I-81 SB RAMPS/ US 11 (FRONT ST.) (INTERCHANGE 5)

Northbound Thru PM D – 0.98

I-81 SB RAMPS/ US 11 (FRONT ST.) (INTERCHANGE 5)

Southbound Left PM F – 0.99

NY 17 EB OFF RAMP/ US 11 (FRONT ST.) INTERCHANGE 72

Eastbound Right AM F – 1.00

NY 17 EB OFF RAMP/ US 11 (FRONT ST.) INTERCHANGE 72

Eastbound Left PM F – 1.05

PROSPECT STREET/ US 11 (FRONT ST.)

Southbound Thru AM C – 0.93

PROSPECT STREET/ US 11 (FRONT ST.)

Eastbound Left PM F – 1.05

BEVIER STREET/ NY 7 SB ON RAMP/ STATE

STREET Eastbound Thru PM E – 0.92

BEVIER STREET/ NY 7 SB ON RAMP/ STATE

STREET Southbound Thru PM E – 0.91

BEVIER STREET/ NY 7 NB OFF RAMP

Northbound Thru PM D – 0.91

The 2000 Highway Capacity Manual’s Level of Service (LOS) methodology also

presents a standard procedure for analyzing unsignalized intersections. A level of service analysis based on the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual was completed for the unsignalized intersections of Mygatt Street with the NY 17 WB off ramp and for Mygatt Street with LaGrange Street and Ridge Street. The results of this analysis are shown below in Table II-5. As shown in the table all of the approaches meet the desirable LOS C.

II-22

Table II-5 – Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis

Mygatt Street

Unsignalized

Intersection Year 2003 – AM Year 2003 – PM Year 2041 – AM Year 2041 – PM

NY 17 WB Off Ramp

WB LT/RT

B (12 secs.)

WB LT/RT

B (11 secs.)

WB LT/RT

B (15 secs.)

WB LT/RT

B (14 secs.)

LaGrange St./Ridge St.

WB LT/TH

A (9 secs.)

EB TH/RT

A (9 secs.)

WB LT/TH

A (9 secs.)

EB TH/RT

A (9 secs.)

WB LT/TH

A (9 secs.)

EB TH/RT

A (9 secs.)

WB LT/TH

A (9 secs.)

EB TH/RT

A (9 secs.)

C.1.j. Non-Standard Features and Non-Conforming Features

The following non-standard highway features were identified using the record

plans and the base mapping for the project area. The non-standard features are based on the 2004 AASHTO Geometric Guide to Highways and Streets, the NYSDOT Highway Design Manual and the design criteria found in Section III.A. The information is based on the functional classification of Interstate for the mainline NY 17, I-81 and the NY 17/I-81 overlap section beyond the two lane ramps connecting these roadways with each other. The functional classification of direct connect ramp is being used for the two lane roadways connecting NY 17, I-81 and the NY 17/I-81 overlap section within the NY 17/I-81 interchange. A functional classification of urban interstate ramp is being used for the ramps at Interchanges 72, 4 and 3. Figure II-4 shows the locations of the non-standard features on the project base mapping.

Shoulder Width – The design criteria requires a minimum left shoulder width of 1.2 meters for Interstate classification, 1.0 meters for direct connect ramps and other ramps and 1.2 meters for arterials. The minimum right shoulder width is 3.0 meters for Interstate classification, 2.4 meters for direct connect ramps, 2.0 meters for other ramps and 2.4 meters for arterials. The following sections of roadway do not meet the shoulder width criteria:

• NY 17 from west of the project area to approximately 100 meters west of Mygatt Street has a left shoulder in each direction with a width of 1.05 meters while the minimum is 1.2 meters.

• The NY 17/I-81 overlap section from east of Chenango Street to approximately 300 meters east/south of Broad Avenue, including BIN’s 1013071 and 1013072, has a left shoulder in each direction that varies from 0.8 meters to 0.915 meters, while the minimum is 1.2 meters.

• BIN’s 1031181, 1031182, 103118B and 103118A have right and left shoulder widths of 0.9 meters while the minimum is 2.4 meters and 1.2 meters for the right and left shoulder, respectively.

• BIN’s 1013061 has a right shoulder width of 0.3 meters and a left shoulder width of 0.6 meters, while the minimum is 3.0 meters and 1.2 meters for the right and left shoulder, respectively.

• BIN’s 101307A, 101307B, 101307C and 101307D have left and right shoulder widths of 0.6 meters while the minimum is 1.0 meters for the left shoulder and 2.0 meters for the right shoulder.

• BIN’s 1013071 and 1013072 have right shoulder widths of 0.8 meters while the minimum is 3.0 meters.

• NY 363 and NY 7 have a left shoulder width that varies from 0.3 meters to 1.07 meters from south of Frederick Street to approximately 230 meters north of Frederick Street while the minimum is 1.2 meters.

• NY 363 has a right shoulder width of 0.9 meters from the bridge over Robinson Street to approximately 300 meters south of Frederick Street, while the minimum is 2.4 meters.

• NY 7 NB and SB have a right shoulder width of 0.9 meters beneath the NY 17/I-81 overpass due to piers located close to the roadway, while the minimum is 2.4 meters for the roadway classification.

II-24

Bridge Roadway Width – All of the bridges with non-standard shoulders listed above also have non-standard bridge roadway widths as the minimum bridge roadway width is the same as the approach travel lane and shoulder widths.

Grade – The grade on the 3-lane section of NY 17 EB between RM 17-9107-2012

and 2014 is –5.0% while the Interstate design criteria requires a maximum grade of 4.0%.

Horizontal Curvature – The minimum horizontal curve radius is 501 meters for Interstate classification, 113 meters for direct connect ramps and ramp classification and 43 meters for loop ramp classification. The following horizontal curves within the project area do not meet the minimum horizontal curve radius criteria:

• The three and four lane section of NY 17 EB around Prospect Mountain between RM 17-9107-2013 and 2016 has a 291 meter curve while the minimum is 501 meters. The accident analysis indicates that this section of NY 17 was on the Priority Investigation Location lists for the years 1995-1998 and also the two year period ending in 2005.

• The three and four lane section of NY 17 WB around Prospect Mountain between RM 17-9107-2013 and 2016 has a 298 meter curve while minimum is 501 meters. The accident analysis indicates that this section of NY 17 was on the Priority Investigation Location lists for the years 1995-1998 and also the two year period ending in 2005.

• Ramp F has a horizontal curve on its approach to US 11 that is 37 meters while the minimum is 113 meters.

• NY 17 EB/I-81 SB and NY 17 WB/I-81 NB have 437 meter horizontal curves approximately 300 meters east/south of Broad Avenue while the minimum is 501 meters.

Stopping Sight Distance – The minimum stopping sight distance is 220 meters for

Interstate classification, 85 meters for direct connect ramp classification and ramp classification, 50 meters for loop ramp classification, 185 meters for an arterial with a design speed of 100 km/h and 160 meters for an arterial with a design speed of 90 km/h. The following vertical curves within the project area do not meet the minimum sight distance criteria:

• NY 17 EB at RM 17-9107-2014 has a sag vertical curve with a headlight sight distance of 105 meters while the minimum is 220 meters for this section of NY 17 EB as its classification is Interstate.

• NY 17 WB at RM 17-9107-2014 has a sag vertical curve with a headlight sight distance of 162 meters while the minimum is 220 meters for this section of NY 17 WB as its classification is Interstate.

• Ramp F has a sag vertical curve just prior to its intersection with US Route 11 that has a headlight sight distance of 48 meters while the minimum is 85 meters.

• NY 17 WB off ramp to Mygatt Street has a sag vertical curve at the intersection with Mygatt Street that has a headlight sight distance of 12 meters while the minimum is 85 meters.

• NY 17 EB/I-81 SB has a sag vertical curve just west of NY 7 that has a headlight sight distance of 209 meters while the minimum is 220 meters.

• NY 17 EB/I-81 SB and NY 17 WB/I-81 NB have crest vertical curves on the viaduct over the Canadian Pacific Rail Yard that have a stopping sight distance of 187 meters while the minimum is 220 meters.

• NY 17 WB/I-81 NB has a sag vertical curve approximately 200 meters west of Broad Avenue that has a headlight sight distance of 216 meters while the minimum is 220 meters.

• US 11 has a crest vertical curve just north of the NY 17 EB off ramp intersection with a stopping sight distance of 143 meters while the minimum is 160 meters.

• NY 7 has a sag vertical curve just south of Frederick Street with a headlight sight distance of 177 meters while the minimum is 185 meters.

• NY 7 has a crest vertical curve on the bridge over Bevier Street with a stopping sight distance of 146 meters while the minimum is 185 meters.

II-25

The following horizontal curves within the project area have a non-standard sight distance along the inside of the curve due to the presence of cut slopes, bridge barrier or guide rail at the edge of the shoulder:

• The inside travel lane of NY 17 EB, NY 17 WB, I-81 NB and I-81 SB on their respective bridges over the Chenango River have a horizontal sight distance of approximately 82 meters on their horizontal curves due to the bridge barrier at the edge of the shoulder, while the minimum for direct connect ramp classification is 85 meters.

• NY 17 WB on the horizontal curve around Prospect Mountain has a horizontal sight distance of 182 meters along the inside lane and 205 meters along the middle lane due to the rock cut slope along the inside of the horizontal curve. The minimum sight distance required is 220 meters for this section of roadway.

• NY 17 EB on the horizontal curve around Prospect Mountain has a horizontal sight distance of 196 meters along the inside lane and 218 meters along the middle lane due to the cut slope along the inside of the horizontal curve. The minimum sight distance required is 220 meters for this section of roadway.

• NY 17 WB/I-81 NB on the horizontal curve east/south of Broad Avenue has horizontal sight distances of 136 meters along the inside lane, 177 meters along the middle lane and 211 m along the outside lane while the minimum sight distance required is 220 meters. The sight distance is restricted due to the concrete median barrier separating the two roadways.

• The Ramp AO exit curve from the WB/NB CD road on BIN 101307C has a stopping sight distance along the inside of the curve of approximately 36 meters due to the bridge barrier at the edge of shoulder while 50 meters is the minimum.

• The Ramp AI entrance curve to the WB/NB CD road on BIN 101307D has a stopping sight distance along the inside of the curve of approximately 36 meters due to the bridge barrier at the edge of shoulder while 50 meters is the minimum.

• The Ramp BO entrance curve to the EB/SB CD road on BIN 101307A has a stopping sight along the inside of the curve of approximately 39 meters due to the bridge barrier at the edge of shoulder while 50 meters is the minimum.

• The Ramp BI exit curve from the EB/SB CD road on BIN 101307B has a stopping sight distance along the inside of the curve of approximately 39 meters due to the bridge barrier at the edge of shoulder while 50 meters is the minimum.

Horizontal Clearance – The minimum horizontal clearance for all roadways should

be equal to the shoulder width of the roadway, therefore the sections of roadway with non-standard shoulder widths mentioned above also have a non-standard horizontal clearance.

Vertical Clearance – The following structures do not meet the minimum vertical

clearance listed in the design criteria:

• BIN 1063249, NY 17 over Mygatt Street has a minimum vertical clearance of 4.29 meters while the minimum required is 4.30 meters.

• BIN 1031181, I-81 SB over Ramp EA has a minimum vertical clearance of 4.49 meters while the minimum required is 4.90 meters.

• BIN’s 1013071 & 1013072, NY 17/I-81 over NY 7 has a minimum vertical clearance of 4.34 meters while the minimum required is 4.90 meters. The minimum required clearance is based on the NHS Intermodal Connector designation for this segment of NY 7.

Level of Service – The minimum level of service is D for an Interstate functional

classification and because the project area is being considered a heavily developed metropolitan area. The following section of roadway within the project area does not meet this standard:

• The NY 17 WB/I-81 NB CD road has a weave segment between Ramps AI and DI with a level of service of E during the PM peak hour.

• The NY 17 WB off ramp junction to Mygatt Street has a LOS E during the PM peak hour.

II-26

Median Width – The minimum median width is 3.0 meters for an Interstate functional classification. The following sections of roadway within the project area do not meet this standard:

• NY 17 has a paved median with concrete median barrier that is 2.81 meters wide from the western project limit to approximately 120 meters west of Mygatt Street.

• The NY 17/I-81 overlap section has a paved median with concrete median barrier that is 2.4 meters wide from approximately 100 meters east of Chenango Street to approximately 300 meters east/south of Broad Avenue.

The following non-conforming features were identified using the record plans and

the base mapping for the project area, and are based on the 2004 AASHTO Geometric Guide to Highways and Streets and the NYSDOT Highway Design Manual.

• The NY 17 WB off ramp to Mygatt Street has a deceleration lane that is approximately 50 meters long while AASHTO recommends a 147.5 meter length for a 60 km/h exit curve.

• The NY 17 EB off ramp to US 11 (Ramp F) is a tapered ramp terminal with a deceleration lane that is approximately 60 meters long while AASHTO recommends a 130 meter length for a 70 km/h exit curve.

• The weaving length between the WB/NB CD road merge with NY 17/I-81 and the NY 17 WB split from I-81 NB is approximately 400 meters while AASHTO recommends a distance of 480 meters.

• The weaving length between the NY 17 EB/I-81 SB merge and the diverge to the EB/SB CD road is approximately 410 meters while AASHTO recommends a distance of 480 meters between.

• The split between NY 17 EB/I-81 SB and the exit ramp to the EB/SB CD road does not follow the AASHTO principles on lane balance. NY 17 EB/I-81 SB has four lanes on the approach to this exit with two lanes continuing along the mainline and two lanes continuing to the EB/SB CD road. AASHTO recommends that at exits, the number of approach lanes on the highway should be equal to the number of lanes on the highway beyond the exit, plus the number of lanes on the exit, minus one.

• The split between NY 17 WB/I-81 NB and the exit ramp to the WB/NB CD road does not follow the AASHTO principle on lane balance. NY 17 WB/I-81 NB has three lanes on the approach to this exit with two lanes continuing along the mainline and one lane continuing to the WB/NB CD road. AASHTO recommends that at exits, the number of approach lanes on the highway should be equal to the number of lanes on the highway beyond the exit, plus the number of lanes on the exit, minus one.

• The WB/NB CD road deceleration lane for Ramp AO is approximately 35 meters long while AASHTO recommends 120 meters for the 40 km/h exit curve on this ramp.

• The acceleration length for Ramp AI traffic to merge with the WB/NB CD road and for the Ramp CI traffic to merge with the EB/SB CD road is approximately 120 meters while AASHTO recommends 205 meters for the 40 km/h entrance curve on these ramps.

• There is no acceleration lane for Ramp DO traffic to merge with the WB/NB CD road or for the Ramp BO traffic to merge with the EB/SB CD road.

• The acceleration length for Ramp BA traffic to merge with NY 17 EB/I-81 SB is approximately 190 meters while AASHTO recommends 495 meters for the 60 km/h entrance curve and the 4% ascending grade.

• The deceleration length for Ramp BB is approximately 70 meters long while AASHTO recommends 170 meters for 60 km/h exit curve and the 4% descending grade on the approach to the ramp terminal.

C.1.k. Safety Considerations, Accident History and Analysis

The study area for this project includes the portion of NY 17 within the limits of

the city of Binghamton and the portion of I-81 from Interchange 5 southerly and easterly to the eastern city line. The study limits are presented in three segments with Segment 1 on NY 17 from RM 17-9107-2000

II-27

(western city limit) easterly to RM 17-9107-2017 (NY 17/I-81 split). At this junction, NY 17 continues easterly, overlapping with Interstate 81. The Segment 2 study limits include I-81 from Interchange 5 (RM 81I-9101-3005) southerly to the north city limit near the NY 17/I-81 split (RM 81I-9101-3000). At this junction, I-81 continues southerly, overlapping with NY 17. Segment 3 includes the NY 17/I-81 overlap from RM 81I-9101-2029 (north city limit), where NY 17/I-81 continues southerly and easterly to the eastern Binghamton City Line (RM 81I-9101-2000).

There were one hundred seventy-eight accidents in the study area during the two

years of 2002 and 2003. The overall accident rate is 0.48 accidents per Million Vehicle Kilometers (MVKm) traveled. The statewide average for combined mainline/juncture accident rate for urban, divided, six lane roadways is 1.40 accidents (all types) per MVKm. There were two fatalities within the study limits, both occurring within Segment 3, the NY 17/I-81 overlap segment. Seventy-one of the accidents resulted in personal injuries and one-hundred seven in only property damage. This severity distribution is significantly low. Ninety of the accidents were related to the interchanges and ramps with the majority occurring within the overlap NY 17/I-81 ramp junctures and weaving sections between the north city limit and Interchange 4. The linear or overall non-intersection (juncture) rate for the study area is not included since Segment 3 has the highest number of accidents and includes the influences of traffic patterns at the NY 17/I-81 Interchange, the six major splits and merges, and Interchange 4.

Portions of the project limits have appeared on the two most recent Statewide High

Accident Location (HAL) list (24 month periods ending 12/31/02 and 12/31/05). This list provides reports on Priority Investigation Locations (PIL), Safety Deficient Locations (SDL), and Priority Investigation Intersections (PII). The High Accident Location (HAL) list for the 24 month periods ending 12/31/02 and 12/31/05, shows Priority Investigation (PIL) and Safety Deficient (SDL) locations as follows:

Period Segment RM – RM Accident Rate

24 months ending 12/31/05 1 (NY 17) 17 9107 2015 – 2017 (SDL) 1.58 acc/MVKM 3 (I–81) 17 9107 2017 – 81I 9101 2028 (PIL) 2.03 acc/MVKM

24 months ending 12/31/02 1 (NY 17) 17 9107 2009 – 2012 (PIL) 5.56 acc/MVKM

1/3 (17/81) 17 9107 2013 – 81I 9101 2028 (PIL) 4.41 acc/MVKM 2/3 (I-81) 81I 9101 2029 – 2030 (SDL) 2.97 acc/MVKM

The accident rates for these locations are based on the accident information from the lists during the time period shown and all of the rates are significantly higher than the statewide average of 1.10 acc/MVKM for a similar facility. No portion of the project area appears on War on Utility Poles “Bad Actor” listing for the periods ending 2002 and 2005.

Several Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) studies have been

completed in the past for these current project roadway segments. The most recent capital improvement projects resulting from these studies is D260155 (PIN 9500.93), which constructed the widening of the Interchange 5 northbound off-ramp to two lanes beginning at the ramp gore and ending at its signalized intersection with US 11 (Front Street). The ramp widening was completed in 2006. The second project, D260321 (PIN 9804.94), was completed since the Year 2003 Accident Reports. This project replaced overhead guide sign panels within the project limits and placed Cross Feature Signs. In 2006 the legend “Owego” was added to the overhead guide signs prior to the southbound/westbound split and the westbound/northbound split. The third project, D258406 (PIN 9066.49), was completed in 2001. This project rehabilitated NY 17 (Segment 1) from Interchange 67 to the Chenango River (RM 17 9107 2017). The project placed a minimal overlay from RM 17 9107 2011 to RM 17 9107 2017, in anticipation of any reconfiguration of the NY 17/I-81 split that may come about as a result of this project. As summarized above, Segment 1 still remains on the PIL and SDL lists since the resurfacing project was completed in 2001. Another project, PIN 9067.21, was let in August 2005 that repaired the distressed areas in this section and overlaid the roadway area with a top course at a 19 millimeter thickness that will provide a 5-7 year service life. This project provided a smooth roadway surface and temporarily eliminated the reflective cracking at the existing PCC joints that are not aligned with the pavement markings.

II-28

Presently on-going is the design of new roadway lighting for the NY 17/I-81 Interchange and its immediate approaches. The design includes repair and upgrading of existing conventional light standards and luminaries and installation of new high mast lighting within the interchange ramp areas. The high mast lighting pole locations also anticipate any future reconfiguration of the NY 17/I-81 split.

Table II-6 is a summary of numbers of accidents occurring during Years 2002 and

2003 and the resulting rates for the three segments of the study area. Segment 3 was further subdivided into two sections, as 3A for the NY 17/I-81 overlap ramp and weaving influence section from the north city limits to Broad Avenue and section 3B from Broad Avenue to the east city limits.

Table II-6 – Accident Summary

Segment

No. of Accidents

Overall Accident Rate

(MVKm)

Linear Accident Rate

(Non-intersection) (MVKm)

No. 1 17 9107 2000 – 2017 47 0.35 0.34

No. 2 81I 9101 3005 – 3000 26 0.65 0.40

No. 3 81I 9101 2000 – 2029 105 0.45 N/A

No. 3A NY 17/I-81 Int. & Int. 4 78 0.95 N/A

No. 3B East of Broad Avenue 27 0.24 0.24

The overall statewide (mainline and juncture) average accident rate for urban, six

lane, divided facilities is 1.40 accidents per MVKm. The statewide average linear (mainline only) accident rate for urban, six lane, divided facilities is 1.09 accidents per MVKm.

Segment 1: NY 17 from Binghamton west City Line to the NY 17/I-81 split (RM

17 9107 2000 – RM 17 9107 2017). The two year study period had forty-seven accidents that occurred on NY 17 from

the west City Line (RM 17 9107 2000) to the NY 17/I-81 split (RM 17 9107 2017) that included seventeen fixed object collisions, fourteen rear end collisions, and six unsafe lane change/overtaking accidents. There were four collisions with debris on the roadway and six miscellaneous accidents (two deer hits, one where a hood popped open, one motorcycle, and two right angle collisions). Twenty-two accidents occurred in the eastbound direction and twenty-five accidents occurred in the westbound direction. The two year period of forty-seven accidents is a significant reduction in the number of accidents as compared to the one hundred eighty-seven occurring during the three year study period of 1996 to 1999 from the previous accident analysis included in Appendix A.

There were thirty accidents in the section of NY 17 from RM 17 9107 2009 to

2017 which appears on the High Accident Location (HAL) lists for periods ending 2002 and 2005. Sixteen occurred in the eastbound lanes and fourteen in the westbound lanes. The overall accident rates for this HAL listed section of NY 17 are 0.48 accidents per MVKm eastbound and 0.46 accidents per MVKm westbound. Overall, there were three collisions with debris in the segment from RM 2009-2017. Seven accidents occurred when the road surface had slippery conditions. Three of the accidents that occurred in the eastbound direction of this High Accident Location were due to sun glare during the morning hours.

NY 17 Eastbound – Of the twenty-two accidents occurring between the West City

Line and the NY 17 EB/I-81 NB split just east of the Interchange 72 exit ramp, one was a lane change accident and thirteen were rear end collisions. The rear end collisions consisted of seven which were related to sun glare during the morning hours. There were six fixed object collisions in this direction of which two were with guide rail on the right side.

Eight accidents occurred near the Interchange 72 off ramp to US 11 (Front Street).

There were two rear end, four fixed object type collisions, and two debris related accidents near this exit ramp. The fixed object accidents resulted primarily due to losing control of the vehicle on the curve adjacent to the exit ramp. As stated above, this section appears on the latest HAL lists. The exit has a taper type ramp terminal with a deceleration length that does not meet AASHTO criteria. A parallel deceleration lane should be considered for this exit. Chapter 10 of the AASHTO A Policy on Geometric Design of

II-29

Highways and Streets 2004 recommends that “if the undesirable condition of a right hand exit off a mainline curve to the left exists, a parallel deceleration lane should be considered since it is less likely to confuse through traffic”. Also, the length of the existing ramp from its diverge from NY 17 to its stop condition does not meet the minimum recommended by AASHTO Exhibit 10-73. This could be a contributing factor to the rear end collisions.

A major problem in this area, as noted in the previous accident study in Appendix

A, is the geometry through the curve around Prospect Mountain. The three NY 17 eastbound lanes descend in grade into a non-standard 291 meter radius curve to the left. A taper type exit ramp to US 11 (Front Street) extends off this curve at RM 2014. Continuing east, NY 17 eastbound diverges from the ramp to I-81 northbound. At RM 2017, the right two lanes extend across the Chenango River for access to I-81 southbound and NY 17 eastbound. The left two lanes continue north, meeting I-81 northbound at RM 81I 9101 2029. There has been a significant reduction in accidents in this section from seventy-five in the previous accident study to 16 in this study. This reduction is most likely the result of this diverge being striped to provide lane balance at the split, which did not exist previously. Most of the accidents that occurred in this segment during the previous study were related to drivers having to make lane change decisions superimposed on the poor road geometry.

The original accident analysis indicated that safety benefits would be accrued if

the curves around Prospect Mountain were flattened. However, due to the environmental and social impacts of flattening this curve, it was more practical to retain the approximate curvature flattening them slightly, but shifting the NY 17 EB/Ramp EA diverge to the west such that all decision making was occurring on the tangent section of roadway west of Prospect Mountain. The curves around Prospect Mountain will now be retained as direct connector ramps rather than the Mainline. According to Table 1A of NYSDOT Traffic & Safety’s Accident Reduction Factors, Factor 105 Other Channelization, 24% of overall accidents would be reduced by shifting the channelization for the major diverge further to the west on a tangent section of the roadway. The annual safety benefit for shifting the NY 17 EB/Ramp EA diverge west of Prospect Mountain is $82,100 and with a thirty year service life and 4% per year rate of return, the present worth is approximately $1.42 million.

An additional improvement that would provide safety benefits would be

converting the NY 17 eastbound deceleration lane for the off ramp to US 11 (Front Street) from a taper type ramp terminal on a curve to a longer parallel type ramp terminal with its taper and a section of the deceleration lane on a tangent section rather than on a curved alignment. The annual safety benefit is $41,100 and with a 30 year service life and 4% per year rate of return, the present worth is approximately $710,000.

NY 17 Westbound – Twenty-five accidents occurred between the NY 17 westbound and I-81 southbound merge to the West City limit. Five unsafe lane change/overtaking accidents, one rear end collision, eleven with fixed objects, and eight miscellaneous accidents occurred. The fixed object accidents resulted primarily from vehicles losing control due to slippery conditions. The miscellaneous accidents involved a motorcycle, animal related, right angle, a hood popped open, and debris. Fourteen of the twenty-five accidents in the westbound segment appear within the High Accident Location (HAL) listed section of NY 17 from RM 17 9107 2017 to 2009 for periods ending 2002 and 2005. The overall accident rates for this HAL listed section of NY 17 is 0.46 accidents per MVKm. This rate was based on eight with fixed objects, three unsafe lane change/overtaking accidents, one debris related, one deer hit, and one right angle at the westbound off-ramp intersection with Mygatt Street. The fixed object accidents resulted primarily from vehicles losing control due to slippery conditions.

Both I-81 southbound and NY 17 westbound traffic approach the merge at RM

2017 on 291 meter radius curves. The two southbound lanes meet the two westbound lanes and continue west into a 298 meter radius curve. The four lanes are blended to three by dropping the right lane. Pavement markings are such that no lane changes are required for three of the four lanes negotiating the curve at the merge. The three unsafe lane change/overtaking accidents are probably influenced by the skew of the approaches making vehicles in adjacent lanes difficult to see, especially while negotiating such a sharp curve.

II-30

As stated previously, due to the environmental and social impacts of flattening this curves around Prospect Mountain, it was more practical to retain the approximate curvature flattening them slightly, but shifting the NY 17 WB/Ramp EB merge to the west such that all decision making was occurring on the tangent section of roadway west of Prospect Mountain. The curves around Prospect Mountain will now be retained as direct connector ramps rather than the Mainline. According to Table 1A of NYSDOT Traffic & Safety’s Accident Reduction Factors, Factor 105 Other Channelization, 24% of overall accidents would be reduced by shifting the channelization for the major merge further to the west on a tangent section of the roadway. The annual safety benefit for shifting the NY 17 WB/Ramp EB merge to the west of Prospect Mountain is $75,800 and with a 30 year service life and 4% per year rate of return, the present worth is approximately $1.31 million.

Segment 2: I-81 from Interchange 5 to the Binghamton north City Line (RM 81I 9101 3005 to RM 81I 9101 3000)

I-81 Northbound and Southbound – There were twenty-six accidents in the

segment of I-81 from Interchange 5 (RM 81I 9101 3005) to the north city line (RM 81I 9101 3000). Nineteen occurred in the northbound lanes and seven in the southbound lanes. There were seven rear end collisions, seven fixed object collisions, five unsafe lane change/overtaking accidents, two accidents where debris was hit in the roadway, one motorcycle losing control, one right angle, and three deer hits near the pedestrian overpass. Of the nineteen accidents in the northbound lanes there is a cluster of accidents related to the Interchange 5 northbound off-ramp to US 11 (Front Street). Eleven of the accidents are related to rear-end, unsafe lane changes, or lost control due to slippery conditions. A section of this segment of I-81 also appears on the High Accident Location (HAL) lists as a Safety Deficient Location (SDL) for the period ending 2002. The cluster of accidents on the approach to this off-ramp could possible indicate a lack of capacity on the ramp to efficiently serve the exiting traffic volumes. As noted earlier, a recently completed project (D260155), widened the off ramp to two lanes from the point where it diverges from I-81 to the intersection with US 11 to increase the capacity. The increased capacity resulting from the widening should reduce the number of accidents in the vicinity of the off ramp.

Segment 3: I-81 and NY 17/I-81 overlap from the Binghamton east City Line to

the Binghamton north City Line (RM 81I 9101 2000 to RM 81I 9101 2029) The one hundred five accidents that occurred on this section of I-81 and the NY

17/I-81 overlap section, between the east City Line (RM 81I 9101 2000) and the north City Line (RM 81I 9101 2029), consisted of thirty-two fixed object collisions, twenty-six unsafe lane change/overtaking accidents, thirty-three rear end collisions, nine collisions with debris, and three miscellaneous accidents (1 deer hit and 2 right angle collisions). There were two fatal accidents in this segment during the two year study period. The first fatal accident was in January and resulted from a northbound vehicle traveling in the I-81 southbound lanes just south of the Broad Avenue interchange. The second fatal accident occurred during the month of September and was a motorcycle accident that occurred at the NY 17 westbound/I-81 northbound split when the motorcycle lost control. Fifty-five of the accidents occurred in the northbound (westbound) lanes and fifty in the southbound (eastbound) lanes. Interchange 3 with Broad Avenue, Interchange 4 with NY 7 (Brandywine Highway), and the NY 17/I-81 Interchange diverges and merges are within these segment limits. For the total one hundred-five accidents along this segment, twelve were reported within the influence of Interchange 3, thirty-three at Interchange 4, and forty-five at the NY 17/I-81 Interchange. The remaining fifteen are along the linear section of NY 17/I-81, east/south of the project area.

The direct connector ramps at the NY 17/I-81 Interchange appear within the High

Accident Location (HAL) listed section of NY 17 from RM 17 9107 2013 to 81I 9101 2028 for periods ending 2002 and 2005. Section 3 was divided into two sub-sections 3A and 3B due to the proximity of the NY 17/I-81 Interchange to Interchange 4 and their ramp influences on the mainline. The section from the NY 17/I-81 Interchange to Interchange 4 will be Segment 3A and the overlap section from Broad Avenue to the east city limit will be Segment 3B. The two-way traffic volume also reduces significantly east of the Broad Avenue crossing which impacts the accident rate.

II-31

Seventy-eight accidents were reported on the mainline and ramps of the NY 17/I-81 Interchange and Interchange 4 in Segment 3A (the overlap section from Broad Avenue to the north city line). The overall accident rate (mainline and juncture) for this Segment 3A is 0.95 accidents per MVKm, versus the statewide average rate of 1.40 accidents per MVKm. A linear accident rate was not calculated for Segment 3A due to the influence of all of the direct connect ramps, weaving movements and ramp junctions within this section. Segment 3B had twenty-seven reported accidents with an overall accident rate of 0.24 accidents per MVKm, compared to the statewide average rate of 1.40 accidents per MVKm. The linear accident rate (mainline only) for Segment 3B is the same as the overall accident rate as there were no accidents related to junctures within this segment. The statewide average linear rate for this type of roadway is 1.10 accidents per MVKm.

Segment 3A: I-81 and NY 17/I-81 overlap from Interchange 4 to the Binghamton north City Line (RM 81I 9101 2021 to RM 81I 9101 2029) – Northbound

In the northbound direction, there were thirty-five mainline/ramp gore area

accidents and two ramp accidents. The accident rate is 0.84 accidents per MVKm. There was a pattern of eleven unsafe lane change/overtaking accidents and seven rear end accidents in the northbound direction of Segment 3A. Nine of the eleven lane change/overtaking and four of the seven rear-end accidents occur within the short (approximately 450 meters) weaving section between WB/NB CD road merge and the major NY 17 WB/I-81 NB diverge. Chapter 10 of the AASHTO A Policy on Geometric Design of

Highways and Streets 2004 recommends a minimum 480 meter weaving section from a service interchange to a system interchange. Drivers must make decisions on the approach to the diverge to travel westbound or northbound and also observe merging/weaving vehicles from WB/NB CD road at Interchange 4. The roadway in this area is divided into three lanes, with the center lane widening to two lanes at the diverge. Both northbound I-81 and westbound NY 17 traffic diverge at RM 2026 on a bridge directly over the Chenango River with two lanes in each direction. Continuing north, I-81 is on a bridge crossing over US 11 (Front Street), merging with a direct connection ramp from NY 17 eastbound at RM 81I 9101 2029. Between the diverge and merge, there were two accidents on the northbound bridge, one losing control and the other a rear end for traveling too slow. The impact attenuator at the NY 17 westbound/I-81 northbound diverge on the bridge was reported to be hit once. Continuing west, NY 17 is also on a bridge crossing over US 11 (Front Street), merging with a direct connection ramp from I-81 southbound at RM 17 9101 2015 in Segment 1. Between the diverge and merge, there were five accidents on this westbound bridge due to losing control on slippery road conditions.

There were eleven accidents related to the northern ramps and the WB/NB CD

road at Interchange 4. The CD road runs along north side of NY 17/I-81 through Interchange 4 and is separated from the mainline by concrete barrier. The accidents at these ramps include a cluster of four rear-end collisions at the NY 7 northbound off ramp junction with the WB/NB CD road. A cluster of five rear-end accidents was also reported at the NY 7 southbound off ramp junction with the WB/NB CD road. There are double yield signs and advance warning signs on the ramp approach. There were two accidents on the north side loop ramp junctures with NY 7 due to slippery road conditions. Seven accidents occurred along the mainline adjacent to the CD road of which four were rear end, two lane change/overtaking, and one debris related. The accident rates for the NY 7 northbound and southbound off ramp junctions with the CD road is 0.82 and 0.93 accidents per Million Entering Vehicles (MEV), respectively. These rates are higher than the statewide all types average rate for urban entrance ramps merging with one lane which is 0.24 accidents per MEV.

Safety benefits would be accrued if the NY 17 WB/I-81 NB weave section was

eliminated between the merge from Interchange 4 and the major diverge. Accidents would be reduced by eliminating this weaving section with channelization of traffic flow west of Interchange 4. The annual safety benefit is $120,900 and with a thirty year service life and 4% per year rate of return, the present worth is approximately $1.66 million.

Another improvement with safety benefits would be increasing the weaving

distance between loop ramps on the WB/NB CD road at Interchange 4. The annual safety benefit from increasing the length of channelization is $311,900 and with a 30 year service life and 4% per year rate of return, the present worth is approximately $2.091 million.

II-32

Segment 3A: I-81 and NY 17/I-81 overlap from Interchange 4 to the Binghamton

north City Line (RM 81I 9101 2021 to RM 81I 9101 2029) – Southbound In the southbound direction, there were forty mainline/ramp gore area accidents

and one ramp accident. The accident rate is 1.06 accidents per MVKm. There was a pattern of ten unsafe lane change/overtaking accidents and twelve rear-end accidents in the southbound direction of Segment 3A. Three of the ten lane change/overtaking accidents, three of the twelve rear-end accidents, and four lost control due to slippery conditions accidents occurred within the short (approximately 450 meters) weaving section between the major NY 17 EB/I-81 SB merge and EB/SB CD road diverge. As stated above for the northbound side it is recommended to have a minimum 480 meter weaving section from a system to a service interchange. Drivers must make decisions to continue traveling eastbound/southbound on the mainline or exit onto the EB/SB CD road with access to southbound and northbound NY 7 while observing the major merge and weave of NY 17 EB/I-81 SB. The roadway in this area is divided into two thru lanes and two exit lanes to the CD road along the south side of Interchange 4. There is a lack of lane balance at the diverge to the EB/SB CD road as there are four lanes on the approach to this exit with two lanes continuing along the mainline and two lanes continuing to the CD road. AASHTO recommends that at exits, the number of approach lanes on the highway should be equal to the number of lanes on the highway beyond the exit, plus the number of lanes on the exit, minus one. NY 17 eastbound thru traffic must cross one or two lanes to continue east on NY 17 EB/I-81 SB and I-81 SB traffic destined to NY 7 must cross one or two lanes to reach Interchange 4.

Both I-81 southbound and NY 17 eastbound traffic merge at RM 2026 on a bridge

directly over the Chenango River with two lanes from each roadway. North of this merge is the two-lane direct connection ramp from I-81 southbound to the overlap section on which there was one other unsafe lane change accident. At the I-81 southbound split from the direct connect ramp to NY 17 WB at RM 81I 9101 2028 there were a cluster of ten accidents reported including one as a fatal motorcycle accident due to losing control and hitting guide rail. The accidents included four unsafe lane change/overtaking and six fixed object accidents. From this split to NY 17 westbound an additional two accidents occurred on this direct connector ramp, both fixed object accidents due to slippery conditions. On the NY 17 eastbound and direct connector ramp approach to the major merge with I-81 southbound at RM 81I 9101 2026, there were four fixed object accidents due to slippery conditions and one debris related

There were fifteen accidents related to the southern ramps and the EB/SB CD road

at Interchange 4. At the EB/SB CD road junction with the NY southbound on ramp the accidents include a cluster of four rear end collisions, two unsafe lane changes and one fixed object due to slippery conditions. At the NY 7 northbound off-ramp junction with the EB/SB CD road there are a cluster of five rear end accidents reported. There are double yield signs posted on this ramp approach to the CD road. The accident rate for this NY 7 off ramp intersection with the EB/SB CD road is 2.50 accidents per Million Entering Vehicles (MEV). The statewide all types average rate for urban entrance ramps merging with one lane is 0.24 accidents per MEV.

Safety benefits would be accrued if the NY 17 EB/I-81 SB weave section was

eliminated between the major merge and the diverge to Interchange 4. According to Table 1A of NYSDOT Traffic & Safety’s Accident Reduction Factors, Factor 105 Other Channelization, 24% of overall accidents would be reduced by eliminating this weaving section with channelization of traffic flow prior to reaching Interchange 4. The annual safety benefit is $80,600 and with a thirty year service life and 4% per year rate of return, the present worth is approximately $1.40 million.

Further safety benefits will be realized by providing standard acceleration and deceleration lanes at Interchange 4. The first would be for the acceleration lane for NY 17 EB/I-81 SB on ramp from the EB/SB CD road. The annual safety benefit from increasing the length of channelization by providing a standard acceleration lane is $14,400 and with a 30 year service life and 4% per year rate of return, the present worth is approximately $249,000. The second would be for the deceleration lane for NY 17 WB/I-81 NB off-ramp. The annual safety benefit from increasing the length of channelization by providing a standard deceleration lane is $73,400 and with a 30 year service life and 4% per year rate of return, the present worth is approximately $1.268 million. The number of injury accidents at this location

II-33

exceeds the “normal” therefore the average cost of injury accidents was used to determine savings for this improvement.

Segment 3B: NY 17 / I-81 overlap from Interchange 3 (Broad Ave) to the

Binghamton east City Line (RM 81I 9101 2017 to RM 81I 9101 2000) – Northbound In the northbound direction, there were fifteen mainline/ramp gore area accidents.

The accident rate is 0.27 accidents per MVKm. These accidents included three unsafe lane change/overtaking accidents, four rear end accidents, three fixed objects, and five debris related in this segment. Seven of the fifteen accidents occurred between Broad Avenue and the Bigelow Street overpass which included three rear-end, one unsafe lane change, one fixed object, and two debris related.

Segment 3B: NY 17 / I-81 overlap from Interchange 3 (Broad Ave) to the

Binghamton east City Line (RM 81I 9101 2017 to RM 81I 9101 2000) – Southbound In the southbound direction, there were twelve mainline/ramp gore area accidents

including a fatal accident resulting from a northbound vehicle traveling in the I-81 southbound lanes just south of the Broad Avenue interchange. The accident rate is 0.22 accidents per MVKm. These accidents included the one fatal head-on accident, three unsafe lane change/overtaking accidents, one rear end accident, six fixed objects, and one debris related in this segment. Four of the twelve accidents occurred between Broad Avenue and the Bigelow Street overpass which included one rear-end, one head-on, one fixed object, and one debris related.

Refer to Appendix A for an evaluation of safety benefits.

C.1.l. Pavement and Shoulder Conditions

There have been several rehabilitations to NY 17 and I-81 within the project limits

since initial construction of these sections of roadway. The following is a summary of the known pavement maintenance work completed within the project limits subsequent to the original construction:

• An asphalt concrete overlay was placed on NY 17 from Mygatt Street to I-81 in 2000.

• A pavement rehabilitation (crack and seat with asphalt overlay) was completed in 1997 from the west end of the Chenango River bridges to the north on I-81.

• The NY 17/I-81 overlap section from the east end of the Chenango River bridges to Broad Avenue received a pavement reconstruction and major bridge rehabilitation in 1996.

• A mill and pave maintenance project was just recently completed on this same section of roadway and also from Broad Avenue to past the east/south project limit.

• An asphalt concrete overlay was placed on NY 17 from Mygatt Street to the I-81/NY 17 split in 2005 as a preventative maintenance measure because the previous overlay completed in 2000 was showing signs of severe distress.

The 2002 pavement sufficiency rating for NY 17 and the NY 17/I-81 overlap

section is a 7, indicating good condition. A site visit to evaluate the existing pavement condition within the project limits was conducted in December 2002. During the initial drive through it was determined that the pavement generally exhibits uniform levels of distress throughout. The travel lanes exhibited areas of low severity (single crack) full width transverse cracking along with high occurrences of low severity edge cracking and longitudinal cracking. The shoulders showed no visual signs of deterioration throughout the project length.

C.1.m. Guide Railing, Median Barrier, Impact Attenuators

NY 17 – There is box beam guide rail in various locations along the right and left

shoulders of NY 17 EB, NY 17 WB, Ramp F and Ramp EA. The box beam guide rail utilizes both Type I and Type III end assemblies with the Type I end assemblies flared away from the roadway when facing traffic. The guide rail was installed under the recently completed NY 17 rehabilitation project and is in good condition. The box beam guide railing and its terminal sections appear to meet the current design

II-34

standards. The box beam guide railing along the left shoulder of Ramp EA transitions to corrugated beam guide rail near the merge with I-81 NB. Ramp EB also has a run of corrugated beam guide rail along its left shoulder from the diverge from I-81 SB to the merge with NY 17 WB. The corrugated beam guide rail along Ramp EA and Ramp EB is in good condition. The corrugated beam guide rail does not meet current design standards as it should not be used when operating speeds are in excess of 80 km/h. There is single slope concrete median barrier between NY 17 EB and WB from the western project limit to Mygatt Street where it transitions to two single slope half section median barriers which continue for approximately 20 meters. The median barrier is in good condition as it was recently installed in the NY 17 rehabilitation project. There are no impact attenuators in this section of the project.

I-81 – There is corrugated beam guide rail on the left and right shoulders of I-81

NB and SB from north of the project limit to where Ramp EA merges and Ramp EB diverges with I-81 NB and SB respectively. The corrugated beam guide rail is in fair condition with some sections of it being slightly out of alignment. There are two sections along the left shoulder of I-81 SB that are severely damaged from vehicle impacts and one section along the left shoulder of I-81 NB with minor damage. The corrugated beam guide rail does not meet current design standards as it should not be used when operating speeds are in excess of 80 km/h. There is box beam guide rail on the left and right shoulder of I-81 NB and SB on the approaches to BIN 1031181 and 1031182 over the Chenango River. The box beam guide rail on the I-81 SB approach to BIN 1031181 utilizes flared terminals with Type I end assemblies. The leading end of the run of box beam guide rail along the right shoulder of I-81 SB approach to BIN 1031181 is severely damaged from a vehicle hit. The remainder of the box beam guide rail along I-81 is in good condition and appears to meet current design standards. There is no concrete median barrier nor are there any impact attenuators in this section of the project.

NY 17/I-81 Overlap Section – There is box beam guide rail in various locations

along the right and left shoulders of the roadway sections of the NY 17/I-81 overlap section. There is also box beam guide rail along the left and right shoulders of the ramps at Interchange 4. The box beam guide rail utilizes Type I end assemblies with the terminals being flared when facing traffic. All of the box beam guide rail is in good condition and appears to meet current design standards. There is single slope concrete median barrier separating the NY 17 EB/I-81 SB and NY 17 WB/I-81 NB directions from the east end of the bridge over Chenango Street to past the eastern/southern project limit. There is single slope concrete median barrier separating the EB/SB and WB/NB CD roads from their parallel mainline roadways and there is single slope concrete median barrier in the grassed medians between the parallel portions of Ramps CO and CI and Ramps DO and DI. All of the concrete barrier is in good condition and appears to meet current design standards. There are impact attenuators in five different locations within this section of the project. There are two Advanced Dynamic Impact Extension Module (ADIEM) systems on the approach ends of the concrete median barrier that separates the EB/SB CD road and the WB/NB CD road from their respective mainlines. The other three impact attenuators are hex-foam sandwich type impact attenuators and are located at the NY 17 WB/I-81 NB split, the Ramp AO diverge from the WB/NB CD road, and the Ramp BI diverge from the EB/SB CD road. All of the impact attenuators in this section were installed as part of the reconstruction project that was completed in 1996. All of the impact attenuators appear to be in good condition, but there are more recent models of both systems available.

There is corrugated beam guide rail on US 11 from its intersection with Ramp F to where NY 17 EB crosses over US 11. At this point it switches to box beam guide rail to a point just north of where I-81 NB crosses over US 11. Corrugated beam guide rail continues from this point to the north. The corrugated beam guide rail does not meet current design standards as it should not be used when operating speeds are in excess of 80 km/h. The box beam guide rail appears to meet current design standards but is in poor to fair condition with numerous indications of vehicle hits. There are no concrete median barrier or impact attenuators on US 11 within the project limits. NY 363 has box beam guide rail on both sides of the roadway from the southern work limits to approximately 250 meters south of Frederick Street. NY 7 SB has box beam guide rail on the outside shoulder at its diverge from NY 363 and on both shoulders on its approach to the NY 363 overpass. NY 7 NB has corrugated beam guide rail on the outside shoulder from Robinson Street to where it merges with NY 363. NY 7 has a run of corrugated beam guide rail along the east side of the roadway between Frederick Street and Ramp AO, there is box beam guide rail on both sides of NY 7 on the approach to the NY 17/I-81 overpass that connects to single slope half section concrete barrier pier protection beneath the overpass. There is also box beam guide rail on both sides of

II-35

NY 7 on the approach to the bridge over Bevier Street. The box beam guide rail appears to meet current design standards and is in good condition, but the corrugated beam guide rail does not meet current design standards as it should not be used when operating speeds are in excess of 80 km/h. There is concrete median barrier separating the NB and SB lanes on NY 363 and NY 7. There is also concrete median barrier separating the two I-81 NB on ramps from NY 7 SB and Bevier Street. There are three impact attenuators on NY 7 within the project limits. They are all Advanced Dynamic Impact Extension Module (ADIEM) systems with two of them being on the approach end of the concrete median barrier that separates NY 7 NB and SB just north and south of Frederick Street. The third impact attenuator is on the approach end of the concrete median barrier separating the southbound ramps from Bevier Street that go to I-81 NB and NY 7 SB. There is corrugated beam guide rail located behind the sidewalk, on the south side of Prospect Street, from just east of Karlada Drive to just west of the intersection with US 11. The guide rail appears to meet current design standards and is in fair condition. There is no guide rail within the project limits of Lagrange Street, Mygatt Street, Chenango Street or Broad Avenue. There are no concrete median barriers or impact attenuators on Prospect Street, Lagrange Street, Mygatt Street, Chenango Street or Broad Avenue.

C.1.n. Traffic Control Devices (Signs, Signals, etc.)

Traffic signals within the vicinity of the project limits are located at the

intersection of Mygatt Street with Prospect Street, and the intersections of US 11 with the NY 17 EB off ramp (Ramp F) and US 11 with Prospect Street. The intersection of Mygatt Street and Prospect Street is traffic signal controlled under two-phase operation and is owned and maintained by the city of Binghamton. The traffic signals at the intersections of Ramp F and Prospect Street with US 11 are both controlled under a single traffic signal controller (Model 179) with multi-phase operation. This signal is owned and maintained by the NYSDOT.

There are fourteen overhead sign structures within the project limits. Six of the overhead sign structures are carrying signs for NY 17 EB traffic from the western project limit to where NY 17 EB and Ramp EA diverge. One of these sign structures is an overhead curve warning sign with flashing beacons and is located approximately 400 meters prior to the non-standard horizontal curve around Prospect Mountain. There are two overhead sign structures on I-81 SB from the northern project limit to where Ramp EB diverges. There are six overhead sign structures on the NY 17/I-81 overlap section from the NY 17 WB/I-81 NB diverge to the eastern/southern project limit. Three of these sign structures carry signs for NY 17 EB/I-81 SB traffic and four of the sign structures carry signs for NY 17 WB/I-81 NB. One of the sign structures is mounted on BINs 1013071 and 1013072 where Ramp AO diverges from the WB/NB CD road. There are two cantilever sign structures within the overlap section. The first is a dual armed cantilever sign structure mounted on BIN 1013072 at the Ramp BI diverge from the EB/SB CD road. The other cantilever sign structure is mounted on BIN 1013071 where the WB/NB CD road diverges from the mainline. All of the signs and pavement markings within the project area are in good condition as there have been recent rehabilitation projects that included replacing signs and pavement markings. The majority of the existing overhead and ground mounted signage throughout the project area will be replaced due to the extent of the improvements being made. Consideration will also be made to incorporate I-86 sign panels as replacement of, or in conjunction with, NY 17 sign panels.

Existing Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) equipment in the project area

include six Variable Message Signs (VMS) mounted on overhead structures, Highway Advisory Radio (HAR) (not currently functional), Continuous Count Sites and Road Weather Information System (RWIS). Additional details of the existing ITS equipment can be found in the ITS report found in Appendix A.

C.1.o. Structures

(1) Descriptions – Within the project limits, there are fifteen bridges. Bridge

locations are identified by BIN on Figure II-5. The conditions of those bridges potentially impacted by the proposed highway construction were reviewed. Table II-7 summarizes conditions found at each bridge.

II-37

Table II-7 – Summary of Existing Bridge Conditions

BIN 1063249 103118A 103118B 1031182

Feature Carried NY 17

EB NY 17

WB NY 17 EB NY 17 WB I-81 NB

Feature Crossed Mygatt Street Chenango River Chenango River Chenango River

Ref. Marker 17 9107 2009 17 9101 2016 17 9101 2025 81I 9101 2025

Owner/Maintenance NYSDOT NYSDOT NYSDOT NYSDOT

Type Stringer/Multi-Beam or Girder

Stringer/Multi-Beam or Girder

Stringer/Multi-Beam or Girder

Girder & Floorbeam System

Number of Spans 1 1 5 7 4 (1-4) 4 (5-8)

Span Lengths 33.2 30.6 42.6, 42.7, 43.8,

35.1, 22.7

38.4, 37.5, 27.5, 24.2, 24.7, 22.8,

22.7

41.4, 41.6, 41.6, 38.3

35.7, 33.4, 23.3, 15.9

Bridge Roadway Width 15.9 15.9 9.1 9.1 16.4 9.1

Approach Roadway Width

16.8 16.8 12.1 12.1 18.2 11.6

No. of Travel Lanes 3 3 2 2 4 2

Lane Width 3.66 3.66 3.66 3.66 3.66 3.66

Right Shoulder Width 2.9 2.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9

Left Shoulder Width 2.0 2.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9

Approach Right Shoulder Width

3.8 3.8 3.0 3.0 2.4 3.1

Approach Left Shoulder Width

2.0 2.0 1.8 1.8 1.2 1.2

Year Built 1971 1966 1966 1966

Last Inspection 3/2005 12/2004 12/2004 9/2005

Federal Sufficiency Rating

89.5 79.1 75.4 63.9

State Condition Rating 5.188 4.766 4.609 4.469

General Recommendation

6 5 5 5

II-38

Table II-7 – Summary of Existing Bridge Conditions (cont.)

BIN 1031181 1031190 1013061 1013062

Feature Carried I-81 SB Ped. Overpass NY 17 EB/I-81 SB NY 17 WB/I-81 NB

Feature Crossed Chenango River I-81 NB/SB Chenango Street Chenango Street

Ref. Marker 81I 9101 2025 81I 9101 3002 81I 9101 2024 81I 9101 2024

Owner/Maintenance NYSDOT NYSDOT NYSDOT NYSDOT

Type Girder & Floorbeam

System Stringer/Multi-Beam or Girder

Stringer/Multi-Beam or Girder

Stringer/Multi-Beam or Girder

Number of Spans 3 (1-3) 7 (4-10) 3 3 3

Span Lengths 42.9, 43.1, 43.1

39.2, 35.4, 32.1, 21.8, 16.7, 16.7,

12.6

38.7 (max.) 11.3, 16.8, 12.5 11.3, 16.8, 12.5

Bridge Roadway Width 16.4 9.1 3.8 15.2 15.7

Approach Roadway Width

18.2 11.6 0 18.2 18.2

No. of Travel Lanes 4 2 0 4 4

Lane Width 3.66 3.66 0 3.66 3.66

Right Shoulder Width 0.9 0.9 0 0.3 0.3

Left Shoulder Width 0.9 0.9 0 0.3 0.3

Approach Right Shoulder Width

2.4 3.1 0 2.4 2.4

Approach Left Shoulder Width

1.2 1.2 0 1.2 1.2

Year Built 1966 1968 1965 1965

Last Inspection 10/2003 9/2004 4/2004 4/2004

Federal Sufficiency Rating

63.9 N/A 75.3 75.3

State Condition Rating 4.395 4.662 4.656 4.906

General Recommendation

5 5 5 5

II-39

Table II-7 – Summary of Existing Bridge Conditions (cont.)

BIN 101307A 101307B 101307C 101307D

Feature Carried Ramp from NY 7

NB Ramp to NY 7 NB

Ramp from NY 7 NB

Ramp to NY 7 NB

Feature Crossed Relief Relief Relief Relief

Ref. Marker 7 7X 81X 7 9105 1E01 81IX

Owner/Maintenance NYSDOT NYSDOT NYSDOT NYSDOT

Type Stringer/Multi-Beam or Girder

Stringer/Multi-Beam or Girder

Stringer/Multi-Beam or Girder

Stringer/Multi-Beam or Girder

Number of Spans 6 5 6 5

Span Lengths 12.7, 14.3, 14.3, 14.3, 14.3, 14.3

13.2, 14.9, 14.9, 14.9, 14.9

12.4, 14.8, 14.8, 14.8, 14.8, 14.8

8.9, 13.3, 13.4, 13.5, 13.5

Bridge Roadway Width 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.1

Approach Roadway Width

8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5

No. of Travel Lanes 1 1 1 1

Lane Width 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9

Right Shoulder Width 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6

Left Shoulder Width 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6

Approach Right Shoulder Width

2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4

Approach Left Shoulder Width

1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2

Year Built 1965 1965 1965 1965

Last Inspection 5/2004 5/2004 9/2005 9/2005

Federal Sufficiency Rating

91.6 92.0 92.9 88.1

State Condition Rating 5.313 5.365 4.969 4.984

General Recommendation

6 6 5 5

II-40

Table II-7 – Summary of Existing Bridge Conditions (cont.)

BIN 1013072 1013071 1003670

Feature Carried NY 17 EB/I-81 SB

Viaduct NY 17 WB/I-81

NB Viaduct NY 363

Feature Crossed NY 7, CP Rail, Broad Avenue

NY 7, CP Rail, Broad Avenue

NY 7 SB

Ref. Marker 81I 9101 2017 81I 9101 2017 363 9101 1013

Owner/Maintenance NYSDOT NYSDOT NYSDOT

Type Stringer/Multi-Beam or Girder

Stringer/Multi-Beam or Girder

Stringer/Multi-Beam or Girder

Number of Spans 28 29 1

Span Lengths 259 (max.) 259 (max.) 13.4

Bridge Roadway Width 12.6 12.6 9

Approach Roadway Width

15.4 15.4 8.2

No. of Travel Lanes 3 3 2

Lane Width 3.66 3.66 3.96

Right Shoulder Width 0.8 0.8 0.9

Left Shoulder Width 0.8 0.8 0.6

Approach Right Shoulder Width

3.8 3.8 0.9

Approach Left Shoulder Width

0.6 0.6 0.6

Year Built 1965 1965 1965

Last Inspection 12/2004 12/2004 3/2005

Federal Sufficiency Rating

66 66 92

State Condition Rating 4.453 4.328 5.563

General Recommendation

5 5 6

II-41

(2) Clearances – Several structures have deficient vertical and horizontal clearances. With respect to vertical clearance, deficiencies occur at the following locations:

• BIN 1063249, NY 17 over Mygatt Street: Required = 4.30 meters vs. 4.29 meters field measured.

• BIN 1031181, I-81 SB over Ramp EA: Required = 4.90 meters vs. 4.49 meters field measured.

• BIN’s 1013071 & 1013072, NY 17/I-81 over NY 7: Required = 4.90 meters vs. 4.34 meters record plans. The required clearance is based on the NHS Intermodal Connector designation for this segment of NY 7.

With respect to horizontal clearances, deficiencies occur at the following locations:

� BIN 1031181, I-81 SB over Ramp EA: Required = 3.60 meters vs. 3.00 meters field

measured. � BIN’s 1013061 & 1013062, NY 17/I81 over Chenango Street, Required = 3.00 meters vs.

2.29 meters record

(3) History and Deficiencies

Roadway Deck Age – Bridge ages range between 32 years and 38 years old. The existing concrete bridge decks are original, although all structures have received a select deep removal and concrete overlay treatment during their life. Due to their age, the conditions of the base structural slabs are suspect. At BIN 1063249 (NY 17 over Mygatt Street), the suspect condition is disguised by stay in place forms. For the Chenango River Bridge crossings, the poor condition of the overlay and base structural slab is documented in the Rehabilitation vs. Replacement Evaluation for these bridges included in Appendix A. For BIN’s 1013061 & 2 (NY 17/I-81 over Chenango Street), as well as BIN’s 1013071 & 1013072 (NY 17/I-81 Viaduct), the poor slab condition is reflected with 2004 inspection ratings of 4 (i.e., the onset of major deterioration has begun).

Structural Steel – The deficiencies of the Chenango River bridge crossings (i.e.,

BIN’s 1031181, 103118A, 103118B and 1031182) are more extensive than others. Section loss in primary members has decreased live load capacity. Inventory ratings are as low as MS 13. Refer to the Rehabilitation vs. Replacement Evaluation in Appendix A for further explanation. At Mygatt Street (BIN 1063249), the load capacity has been reduced to MS 16 and for the NY 17 WB/I-81 NB viaduct (BIN 1013071) the load capacity has been reduced to MS 17.

Approach vs. Bridge Widths – Section 2.3.2 of the NYSDOT Bridge Design

Manual requires that, for Interstates, the approach width be carried across the bridge. In all cases shown on Table II-7, the bridge width is less, in some cases by as much as 3.00 meters.

Bridge Shoulder Widths – With each Chenango River crossing (i.e., BINs

1031181, 103118A, 1031182, 103118B) being classified as direct connection ramps, the required driving lane shoulder is 2.40 meters and the required passing lane shoulder is 1.00 meters. Each bridge currently carries 0.90 meters for both shoulders, making the shoulder width non-standard.

At Chenango Street (i.e., BIN’s 1013061 and 1013062), shoulder width is also

non-standard for the Interstate classification. Required driving lane shoulder is 3.00 meters and passing lane shoulder is 1.20 meters. Existing is 0.30 meters and 0.90 meters wide, respectively.

For the viaducts (i.e., BIN’s 1013071 and 1013072), Interstate classification also

applies. Since both existing shoulders are 0.80 meters wide, shoulder widths here are also non-standard.

(4) Inspection – Refer to Table II-7 and Appendix A for details.

(5) & (6) Restrictions and Future Conditions – None of the bridges are currently posted. However, with continued deterioration and section loss, it is anticipated that the Mygatt Street

II-42

structure, each Chenango River crossing, and the NY 17 WB/I-81 NB viaduct carrying the Interstate will require load posting.

(7) Waterway – Refer to Appendix A for the Coast Guard Jurisdiction Checklist

for the Chenango River crossings.

C.1.p. Hydraulics of Bridges and Culverts

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) published a Flood

Insurance Study (FIS) for the city of Binghamton, New York in December 1976. The Chenango River was studied using detailed methods and, therefore, the original FEMA hydraulic model was obtained for this project. The Chenango River, north of Binghamton, has a watershed area of 4170 square kilometers (1610 square miles) and is part of the Susquehanna River Basin. The design discharges for the Chenango River in the FIS were estimated using discharge-frequency curves for the USGS stream gage at Chenango Forks, as published by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The Chenango Forks stream gage is located 15.4 kilometers (9.6 miles) upstream from Binghamton and has been in operation since 1913. The design discharges are as follows:

Peak Discharges for the Chenango River

10-Year Flood 855 m3/s (30,200 cfs)

50-Year Flood 1380 m3/s (48,800 cfs)

100-Year Flood 1680 m3/s (59,400 cfs)

500-Year Flood 2550 m3/s (90,100 cfs)

Subsequent to review of available historic flooding data and physical characteristics of the Chenango River and the associated floodplain, a preliminary hydraulic analysis of the Chenango River in the vicinity of the NY 17/I-81 interchange was performed using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers HEC-RAS Version 3.0.1 computer program. The Chenango River crosses under the existing bridges at an approximate 90-degree skew and averages 150 meters in width. Stream cross section data were collected approximately 1220 meters upstream and 1340 meters downstream of the bridge. The 100-year flood plain is approximately 440 meters wide upstream of the bridge and 195 meters wide in the vicinity of and downstream from the bridge.

Results of the hydraulic analysis for the Chenango River indicate that the 50-, 100-

, and 500-year flood events pass the existing bridge with a positive freeboard. Only the 500-year flood event impacts the bridge abutments. The existing hydraulic conditions are provided in Table II-8.

Table II-8 – Existing Hydraulic Data for the Chenango River

Drainage Area: 4170 sq. km Design Flood Base Flood

Recurrence Interval, years 50 100

Peak Discharge, m3/s (cfs) 1380 (48,800) 1680 (59,400)

NY 17 WB / I-81 NB (Upstream) Bridge

High Water Elevation, m (ft) 257.86 (845.98) 258.69 (848.73)

Freeboard Provided, m (ft) 7.32 (24.02) 6.48 (21.27)

Average Velocity @ Structure, m/s (fps) 1.16 (3.80) 1.23 (4.04)

II-43

NY 17 EB / I-81 SB (Downstream) Bridge

High Water Elevation, m (ft) 257.84 (845.92) 258.67 (848.66)

Freeboard Provided, m (ft) 4.81 (15.77) 3.97 (13.03)

Average Velocity @ Structure, m/s (fps) 1.17 (3.84) 1.25 (4.11)

C.1.q. Drainage Systems

Existing Drainage West of the Chenango River (Figure II-6) – The existing drainage system includes a series of drainage systems all flowing into the Chenango River. The existing closed systems are split between reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) and corrugated metal pipe (CMP). The RCP begins about 200 meters west of the Mygatt Street bridge and continues to the west along NY 17. The sections of RCP within the project will be inspected for separations and cleaned, but should be able to remain in place if not in conflict with the reconstruction. The sections of CMP generally begin about 200 meters west of the Mygatt Street bridge and continue east. This pipe is approximately 40 years of age and is nearing the end of its design life. The CMP within the project will be removed and replaced with a new drainage system as part of the project. There are no formal water quality treatment, channel protection, or stormwater protection facilities provided for the existing systems. The existing systems are as described below.

System One collects runoff from NY 17 from the western limit of the project to

Ramp F. The runoff is collected into a closed system along NY 17 and outlets directly into the Chenango River across from the Ramp F intersection with US 11. The closed system is a metal pipe system with a diameter size of 1800 mm at the outlet and an age of about 40 years. A large percentage of the water currently being collected by this system is offsite runoff from Prospect Mountain north of the highway.

System Two collects runoff from Ramp F northerly to the median areas of I-81 NB

and SB where they merge and diverge with Ramps EA and EB, respectively. The outlet for this system has a 1350 mm diameter and is located east of US 11 below the I-81 SB and NY 17 EB bridges just before they merge and span the Chenango River. This drainage system is a combination of open channels and closed drainage. Runoff flows off the roadway embankments and the adjacent hillside, is collected in ditches and the median, and is then picked up by the closed system and is conveyed to the Chenango River.

System Three collects runoff from median areas of I-81 NB and SB north of the

merge and diverge with Ramps EA and EB northerly along I-81 to where BIN 1031190 crosses I-81. There is a significant amount of offsite runoff that is collected by this system. The drainage systems are outletted into the median between I-81 and US Route 11, then conveyed via open channel to a 2000 mm diameter culvert that outlets into the Chenango River approximately 190 meters north of where I-81 NB crosses US 11.

System Four collects runoff along Prospect Street from the high point immediately west of Mygatt Street west to the next high point. This system also collects runoff from the NY 17 EB highway embankment north of Prospect Street. The outlet of the system is outside the mapping limits. Runoff is collected into a closed drainage system along Prospect Street, from there it is conveyed south and east through the Spring Forest Cemetery and then piped east to the point of discharge into the Chenango River near the McDonald Avenue pump station. The type of pipe is unknown, but the age is likely to be at least as old as the NY 17 pipes, which are approximately 40 years old.

System Five collects runoff from offsite areas into a closed drainage system at

LaGrange Street. From LaGrange Street, water is piped along Mygatt Street under NY 17 and continues along Mygatt Street outside the project limits. This system connects to System Four just north of the junction of Mygatt and Elm Streets and is also conveyed to the Chenango River near the McDonald Avenue pump station. The type of pipe is unknown, but the age is likely to be at least as old as the NY 17 pipes, which are approximately 40 years old.

II-45

Existing Drainage East of the Chenango River (Figure II-7) – There are five existing drainage systems within the project limits on the east side of the Chenango River.

System Six collects stormwater runoff between the NY 17/I-81 bridges over the

Chenango River and Interchange 4. This outlet collects the majority of the interchange runoff. Runoff is conveyed westerly to the Chenango River. This system is a closed drainage system consisting of reinforced concrete pipe and is approximately 40 years old with the exception of some of the pipes and structures along NY 7 which were replaced approximately 10 years ago under the Brandywine rehabilitation project. The outfall pipe is a 2100 mm diameter RCP that discharges directly into the Chenango River just north of I-81 NB. No water quality or flood protection measures are present in the existing system.

System Seven collects stormwater from the NY 7 interchange with Bevier Street

and is conveyed south into System Eight. This system collects offsite water and runoff from NY 7 north of Interchange 4 including Bevier Street and some of the other local roads north of Bevier Street. This system, within the project area, is a closed drainage system consisting of reinforced concrete pipe. The majority of the system is approximately 40 years old with the exception of some of the pipes and structures along Bevier Street and the ramps at the Bevier Street interchange which were replaced approximately 10 years ago under the Brandywine rehabilitation project.

System Eight collects the runoff from System Seven and additional runoff from the area between Bevier Street and the Interchange 4 ramps. Water is conveyed south through the project area, but picks up only a small percentage of the NY 17/I-81 runoff. This closed drainage system continues south running parallel to NY 7 and eventually empties directly into the Susquehanna River through a 900 mm RCP outlet pipe just east of the NY 7/US 11 intersection.

System Nine collects runoff within the railroad yard and conveys it southerly in open channels and closed systems once outside the project area. The area is bounded by Bevier Street to the north and Broad Avenue to the east. All of the water collected in this system is from offsite runoff. This runoff appears to flow southerly either along the railroad or into the city of Binghamton’s drainage system and eventually into the Susquehanna River.

System Ten collects runoff from NY 17/I-81 between Broad Avenue and the

Chamberlain Creek culvert approximately 750 meters east/south of the project limit. This system is collecting runoff from NY 17/I-81 and offsite areas north of the highway. This system is a closed drainage system consisting of reinforced concrete pipe and is approximately 40 years old. The closed system runs along the south side of NY 17/I-81 to Broad Avenue where it runs north and then west in a 78” RCP beneath the Canadian Pacific Rail Yard to Interchange 4 where it ties into System Six.

All of the existing storm drainage systems within the project area that may be re-used as part of the new storm drainage system should be inspected and cleaned as part of the project.

C.1.r. Soil and Foundation Conditions

There is an existing rock slope on the inside of the horizontal curves around

Prospect Mountain with an approximate slope of between 2 and 3 vertical to 2 horizontal. According to the preliminary recommendations contained in the MEPP, the bedrock in this area is mapped as shales and siltstones. Additionally, the DR/EA for the Lower Brandywine (NY 7) improvements indicate that the portion of NY 7 in the vicinity of Interchange 4 was originally constructed on top of a former solid waste disposal site. At this time, there are no other known unusual soil conditions within the project area. A detailed geotechnical investigation will be completed as the project is progressed.

II-47

C.1.s. Utilities

NY 17 – There are two sanitary sewer pipes crossing under NY 17 within the

project limits. The first is a 200 mm VTP inside a 610 mm RCP casing that crosses NY 17 approximately 300 meters west of Mygatt Street and carries waste from the properties on LaGrange Street to the Prospect Street sanitary sewer system on the south side of NY 17. The second sanitary sewer is also a 200 mm VTP that crosses NY 17 approximately 110 meters east of Mygatt Street and carries waste from the properties on Packard Street to the Prospect Street sanitary sewer system on the south side of NY 17. There is also a 200 mm VTP sanitary sewer on Mygatt Street where it crosses beneath NY 17. Underground utilities on Mygatt Street where it crosses beneath NY 17 consist of a 150 mm water line, a 100 mm SWP gas line in a 200 mm casing, a 200 mm SWP gas line, a cable television duct and a telephone duct. There are underground electrical lines that run between the street lighting within the NY 17 corridor. There are overhead electrical distribution lines crossing over NY 17 in three locations within the project limits. The first crossing is approximately 200 meters east of Mygatt Street, the second crossing, consisting of two sets of distribution lines, is just west of the curves around Prospect Mountain. The third crossing is in the middle of the curves around Prospect Mountain and these are high voltage transmission lines that run from three towers, located between Ramp F and Prospect Street, to three towers sitting atop Prospect Mountain. Lagrange Street has a 150 mm water line that runs along the south side, a 50 mm and 200 mm gas line on the north and south side, respectively, and there are 200 mm VTP sanitary sewers that run along the front of the houses along Lagrange Street. There are also overhead utility lines that run on poles along the north side of Lagrange Street. Prospect Street has a VTP sanitary sewer that runs down the center of the roadway with a diameter between 200 mm and 300 mm. The sewer connects to the sanitary sewer on US 11. There is a water line along the south side of Prospect Street that has a diameter of either 250 mm or 500 mm. There are two gas lines with varying diameters that run along Prospect Street from Mygatt Street to Karlada Drive. At Karlada Drive, one gas line continues to the southeast to Valley Drive and the second gas line continues to the east toward US 11. There are also overhead utility lines that run on poles along the north side of Prospect Street from Mygatt Street to Karlada Drive and there is an underground electric line from Karlada Drive to US 11 for the street lighting. The sanitary sewers and water lines in this area are owned by the city of Binghamton. The underground electric lines between the street lighting is owned by NYSDOT and the other electric lines and gas lines are owned by New York State Electric and Gas (NYSEG). Time Warner Cable owns the overhead and underground cable television lines and Verizon owns the overhead and underground telephone lines.

I-81 – There is a 250 mm VTP sanitary sewer that crosses I-81 NB and SB just

north of where Ramp EB diverges from I-81 SB. There is a 200 mm water line and a 300 mm water line that cross I-81 NB and SB just north of the sanitary sewer crossing. There is also a 200 mm SWP gas line inside of a 300 mm casing that cross I-81 NB and SB just north of the water line crossing. All of these utilities run from the south end of Old Front Street on the west side of I-81 to US 11 on the east side of I-81. There are underground electrical lines that run between the street lighting along I-81 NB and SB. Underground utilities on US 11 where it crosses beneath the NY 17/I-81 interchange consist of a 250 mm VTP sanitary sewer, a 250 mm water line, a 200 mm SWP gas line and electrical lines that run between the street lighting. The sanitary sewer and water line crossing I-81 is owned by the town of Dickinson. The sanitary sewer and water line along US 11 are owned by the city of Binghamton. NYSDOT owns the underground electric lines between the street lighting and NYSEG owns the gas lines.

NY 17/I-81 Overlap Section – There is a 375 mm VTP sanitary sewer in a steel

sleeve that crosses beneath NY 17/I-81 and the Broad Avenue on and off ramps near the eastern project limit. There is also a 300 mm VTP sanitary sewer that crosses beneath BINs 1013071 and 1013072 and runs through a series of manholes on the west side of NY 7 from the south end of State Street to the north end of Brandywine Street. There are underground electrical lines that run between the street lighting along both sides of the overlap section and on the bridges. Underground utilities on Chenango Street where it crosses beneath the NY 17/I-81 overlap section consist of a 450 mm VTP sanitary sewer, a 300 mm water line, and a 150 mm SWP gas line. Underground utilities on Broad Avenue where it crosses beneath the NY 17/I-81 overlap section consist of a 300 mm water line, a 200 mm SWP gas line, a 400 mm SWP gas line, and electrical lines. There are overhead electrical distribution lines, cable television and telephone lines that cross over the overlap section at Chenango Street and overhead cable television and telephone lines that cross over the overlap section at Broad Avenue. There are high voltage transmission lines that cross

II-48

over NY 17/I-81 between towers located just west of Ramps CO, on the south and DO, on the north, at Interchange 4. The sanitary sewers and water lines in this area are owned by the city of Binghamton. NYSDOT owns the underground electric lines between the street lighting and the other electric lines and gas lines are owned by NYSEG. Time Warner Cable owns the overhead cable television lines and Verizon owns the overhead telephone lines.

C.1.t. Railroads

The Canadian Pacific Rail Yard consisting of six tracks runs beneath the NY 17/I-

81 overlap section approximately 200 meters west of Broad Avenue. Canadian Pacific Railroad provides freight service through the northeastern United States and southern Canada. Other railroads that have track rights at the rail yard include New York Susquehanna and Western Railway (NYS&W), Delaware and Hudson Railroad (D&H) and Norfolk Southern Railroad (NS). There is also a single NYS&W spur line approximately 260 meters east of NY 7 that runs parallel to Montgomery Street on the south side of the highway and continues to the north where it dead ends just south of Bevier Street.

C.1.u. Visual Environment

Three landscape units contribute to the visual environment in the project area. The

first is the valley bottom of the Chenango and Susquehanna Rivers, which ranges in width from about 1.6 to 3 kilometers in the general area. The Susquehanna River is not visible from project area roadways, but the Chenango River flows north to south through the project area. The valley bottom is generally level or gently sloping towards the flanking hills, with elevations ranging from about 250 meters near the rivers to 270 meters at the margins of the valleys. Its built-up environment also characterizes this unit. The valley bottom contains the urban core of the Binghamton area, with extensive commercial, industrial and residential development. That portion of the project from the NY 17/I-81 Interchange and roadways to the northern and eastern/southern project termini lie within this landscape unit.

The second landscape unit is the corridor of the Chenango River, from riverbank

to riverbank. It has been considered a separate unit within the valley bottom because it comprises one of the most prominent natural features in the project area, and on the basis of use. Recreational users of the river corridor include fishermen and walkers who utilize the levee on the eastern side of the river. There is occasional boat use, primarily by fishermen. Cheri Lindsey Park, owned by the city of Binghamton, is located on the eastern bank of the river, immediately south of the overlap section of NY 17/I-81. Otsiningo Park, operated by Broome County, is located along the western bank of the river, approximately 0.6 kilometers north of the NY 17/I-81 bridge crossing over the Chenango River. The park is bounded by I-81 on the west. Multi-use trail development along both banks of the river in the project area is being contemplated as part of a waterfront revitalization plan. Twin bridges carry NY 17/I-81 across the Chenango River.

A third landscape unit is comprised of the hills that flank the Chenango and

Susquehanna River valleys. These bordering hills rise steeply from an elevation of approximately 270 meters at the margins of the valley floor, to elevations of 450 meters or higher on the hilltops. The ridgeline of these hills is generally visible from most locations within the valley. One of the hills, Prospect Mountain, is located immediately west of the NY 17/I-81 Interchange and is a prominent feature in the project area. The segment of NY 17 to the west of the interchange follows the southern side of Prospect Mountain. Many areas on the hillsides are undeveloped as result of slope and other restrictions, and land cover in these areas consists of forest. There are areas of low-density residential development where conditions are suitable. The base of Prospect Mountain, south of NY 17, contains extensive residential development. There is also some residential development on the north side of NY 17 where it follows Prospect Mountain, along LaGrange, Packard and Ridge Streets.

C.1.v. Provisions for Pedestrians and Bicyclists

A pedestrian bridge (BIN 1031190) is located over I-81 northbound and

southbound at approximately RM 81I 9101 3002. On the west side of I-81, the path from the pedestrian bridge leads to Old Front Street. On the east side of I-81, the path from the pedestrian bridge leads to the

II-49

US 11 (Front Street)/Bevier Street intersection. There are sidewalks on both sides of Mygatt Street and Chenango Street. There is a sidewalk on the south side of Prospect Street and on the east side of Broad Avenue. Pedestrians and bicyclists utilize the 1.8 meter shoulder on both sides of US 11. Pedestrians and bicyclists are prohibited from using I-81 and NY 17, but there are local bicycle routes on some of the side streets within the project area. US 11 is part of State Bicycle Route 17 and local Bicycle Route 3, Chenango Street is part of local Bicycle Route 4, Prospect Street is part of local Bicycle Route 5 and Broad Avenue is designated as a secondary bicycle route.

C.1.w. Planned Development for Area

The City of Binghamton’s Comprehensive Plan has identified several sites in the

project area with potential for new development. The former Anitec site located west of the NY 17/I-81 Interchange in the city of Binghamton’s First Ward is recommended to be redeveloped as a campus-like environment with clear pedestrian connections to the adjoining neighborhoods and commercial setting. The Comprehensive Plan also states the ultimate long-term success of the Anitec site is dependent on improved accessibility and that consideration should be given to developing a new access road into the site via Prospect Street, west of Spring Forest Cemetery. Another area for potential new development is the North Riverfront District that is located in the northern portion of Binghamton along the Chenango River, east to Brandywine Street, then south to Eldredge Street and north to the NY 17/I-81 overlap section. The Comprehensive Plan recommends establishing a new neighborhood center in the vicinity of Binghamton Plaza and expanding Cheri Lindsey Park. The area available for development east of NY 7 extends from Frederick Street north to Bevier Street. Just east and south of Interchange 4 is the site of Stow Manufacturing and NYSDOT’s Frederick Street Equipment Management Shop. These properties are likely to be put to another use in the future. A large tract of land adjacent to the NY 17/I-81 overlap section, between Montgomery Street and Broad Avenue, is the site of the Canadian Pacific Rail Yard. The rail yard’s size was reduced in recent years, and the abandoned portions remain vacant. The vacant parcels are not contiguous and are not especially conducive to development because the existing street grid is divided by the rail yard. The traffic volumes associated with the development of any available parcel within the project area are dependent upon the specific use of each site. Since no development is proposed at this time, traffic volume projections included in the report do not include potential volumes associated with these sites. A separate traffic study of the proposed Interchange 4 alternatives was completed using traffic volume projections provided by BMTS for an industrial land use scenario and a retail land use scenario to ensure that the proposed roadway configurations in this area would achieve an acceptable level of service under either scenario. The Traffic Study for Property Access Improvements at Interchange 4 is included in a separate technical appendix.

The Binghamton Metropolitan Greenway Study, completed in 1999, and the Local

Waterfront Revitalization Program, completed in 2002, has proposed multi-use paths along both the east and west banks of the Chenango River through the project area and recommend making a bicycle/pedestrian connection between Cheri Lindsey Park and Otsiningo Park.

C.1.x. System Elements and Conditions

The project has no direct relationship to other existing or future transportation

problems in the region. Improvements to NY 17 that are part of the Phase 1 project are a key element in the proposed conversion of NY 17 to Interstate 86. The project will improve the mobility at both the regional and local levels by improving the operational efficiency of the NY 17/I-81 Interchange, by improving the design features at the other interchanges in the project area and by adding a NY 17 WB on ramp at Interchange 72. There are no other projects or problems in the region that would affect the project area mobility.

C.1.y. Environmental Integration

There are three features within the project area, the Chenango River, Cheri A.

Lindsey Memorial Park and the US 11 entrance into the city of Binghamton, that provide an opportunity for environmental enhancement in accordance with the NYSDOT’s Environmental Initiative. The vision for Binghamton’s waterfront, as described in the Draft Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP)

II-50

dated October 2002, is to utilize the waterfront and improve the quality of life for Binghamton residents and visitors. The City recognizes that the waterfront is currently an underutilized and “under-realized” asset within the community. It is further recognized that any development considered for the City’s waterfront should focus on developing the land surrounding the Susquehanna and Chenango Rivers for increased use and accessibility, provide a method to enhance and expand upon existing amenities and provide additional social and economic benefits to residents and visitors to live, work, and play. The Susquehanna River is outside the proposed project area, and therefore, this river is not a feature that provides an opportunity for environmental enhancement associated with this project.

The NY 17/I-81 bridges over the Chenango River will be replaced requiring

construction of new substructures within and along the banks of the river. In accordance with the Binghamton Metropolitan Greenway Study, a goal within the Binghamton metropolitan area is to construct a greenway system of pedestrian and multi-use trails along the banks of the Chenango and Susquehanna Rivers. Specifically within the proposed project area, a long-term goal is to extend the existing multi-use trail known as the Promenade from Clinton Street, where it currently ends, north to Bevier Street/Otsiningo Park. The proposed substructures for the new NY 17/I-81 bridges over the Chenango River will be designed and constructed so as not to impede future construction of a continuous multi-use trail along the east or west bank of the river. In addition, the substructures should be designed with textures and treatments that enhance and/or complement the waterfront area.

The second feature within the project area that provides an opportunity for

environmental enhancement is the Cheri A. Lindsey Memorial Park located on the eastern border of the Chenango River just south of NY 17/I-81. This 13.77-acre park provides a variety of recreational facilities including an outdoor swimming pool, playground, baseball diamond, basketball court and skateboard park. The park also provides opportunities for picnicking and fishing. Currently, the Bevier Street bridge is the only facility across the Chenango River that links the Cheri A. Lindsey Memorial Park or other recreational facilities on the east side of the river to the trail systems and recreational facilities on the west side. Construction of such access is a goal to improve access between the east and west sides of the City’s waterfront area. The city of Binghamton’s Metropolitan Greenway Study shows a future on-road bikeway with a sidewalk or a parallel pedestrian trail across the Bevier Street bridge located just north of the NY 17/I-81 bridges. This location is desirable as it would directly connect to the existing trail system within Otsiningo Park. There currently is a project on the Broome County program to rehabilitate this structure, PIN 9752.68, which is proposed to begin construction in March 2007. The proposed bridge rehabilitation includes widening the bridge to incorporate bicycle lanes and sidewalks on both sides of the structure.

The third feature within the project area that provides an opportunity for

environmental enhancement is the US 11 (Front Street) entrance into the city of Binghamton. Development of a Front Street Gateway from I-81 is a priority of the BMTS. BMTS is developing the Binghamton Gateway Vision Plan as it has determined that there is substantial interest in reconstructing some of the primary entryways into the City into “gateway streets”. These streets could incorporate unique design elements like a raised landscaped median, wide sidewalks, or textured crosswalks; and streetscape elements ranging from arches to banners to benches and trees. The purpose of gateway streets is to project a positive image to travelers coming downtown, which when combined with other efforts can lead to reinvestment, development, and greater economic activity.

C.2. Needs

C.2.a. Project Level Needs

Pavement Needs – The primary pavement needs are associated with NY 17, Ramp

EA and Ramp EB as a pavement rehabilitation of I-81 was completed in 1997 and a pavement reconstruction of the NY 17/I-81 overlap section was completed in 1996. An asphalt overlay was placed on NY 17, from Mygatt Street to the east, as part of the NY 17 rehabilitation project. The overlay was designed to provide a 5-year service life and was installed as an interim patch with this project in mind as a long-term solution. The section of NY 17 from Mygatt Street to the east was overlaid again in 2005 as a preventative maintenance measure because the roadway was showing medium severity longitudinal cracking, edge cracking and full width transverse cracking. Prior to the resurfacing, the 1998 Pavement

II-51

Evaluation and Treatment Selection Report stated that evidence of joint sealer failure, transverse joint faulting, transverse joint distress, longitudinal joint distress, slab cracking, wheelpath rutting and scaling were apparent on this section of NY 17.

Safety Needs – The safety needs include improving NY 17 EB and WB to

eliminate the decision making and lane changing on the horizontal curves around Prospect Mountain, eliminating the short weaving sections between the NY 17/I-81 Interchange and Interchange 4 and providing improved acceleration and deceleration lengths for all entrance and exit ramps. In addition, there are numerous non-standard and non-conforming features that currently exist within the project area.

Capacity Needs – The traffic analysis of the existing conditions determined that

there are roadway segments that do not meet the existing capacity needs or future capacity needs if the proposed project were not constructed. Section II.C.1.i – Level of Service discusses the roadway components within the project area that are at or below the minimum LOS criteria for years 2002 and 2041.

The size of the existing cloverleaf configuration at Interchange 4 is a constraint on the capacity of the weave segment between Ramps AI and DI on the WB/NB CD road. A weave length of 710 meters would be required to achieve a level of service C for this section of roadway. The level of service on the freeway segments is constrained by the number of lanes on those segments. An additional lane would be needed to improve the level of service of these freeway segments.

Bridge Structural Needs – The proposed project is necessary to address existing

structural deficiencies of the bridges within the project limits. Refer back to Section II.C.1.o for details regarding existing conditions and deficiencies of each of the thirteen bridges included as part of this project.

Drainage Needs – There are no drainage problems evident within the project area,

although drainage systems will be replaced and rehabilitated as part of the project.

C.2.b. Area or Corridor Level Needs

Modal Interrelationship – Primary transportation modes in the area are automobile

and truck, with no significant relationship to other modes. The Canadian Pacific Rail Yard is located in the eastern section of the project between NY 7 and Broad Avenue. The viaduct which carries NY 17/I-81 over the rail yard will be reconstructed and widened as part of the project. The proposed reconstruction of the viaduct will reduce the number of spans in the immediate vicinity of the rail yard from 5 to 3, thereby eliminating the 3 piers within the rail yard. This will provide additional space beneath the viaduct for additional tracks that may be required by future development in the area.

System Needs – NY 17 and I-81 are the major links in the regional transportation

network. The section of roadway from Corning, New York, to its junction with I-90 near Erie, Pennsylvania, has been designated I-86. The section from Harriman, New York (junction with I-87), to Corning will be designated as I-86 as required improvements are completed. The NY 17/I-81 Interchange is within the latter segment and is a key component of the proposed I-86 route.

Mobility Needs – Although capacity deficiencies exist within the project area,

there are no extended periods of traffic congestion that significantly affect mobility in the area. Mobility in the project area is affected only during the occasional traffic incident (or periodic construction activities) involving lane or road closures on area freeways that may result in long delays or diversion of traffic to parallel arterial routes. The parallel arterial routes lack sufficient capacity, signal coordination or appropriate signing to handle the additional traffic diverted from the freeways. The project should accommodate potential future growth of traffic volume that may result from the NYSDOT Transformation focus on trade corridors.

Social Demands and Economic Development – There are no social demands or

economic development/land use changes that indicate there is or will be a need to improve capacity within the project limits. Regionally, upon completion of the entire I-86 corridor, economic benefits to the

II-52

Southern Tier region are anticipated. Local and state officials expect that the Interstate-standard highway will attract new business to an economically depressed part of New York State. The project’s consistency with numerous local plans is discussed in Section IV.B.1.b – Local Planning.

C.2.c. Transportation Plans

This project is on the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), the

Binghamton Metropolitan Transportation Study’s Transportation Improvement Plan and the BMTS long-range plan, Binghamton Metropolitan Transportation Study Transportation Tomorrow: 2025. NY 17 and I-81 have been identified as part of the Arterial Highway Network in the Region’s Long Range Comprehensive Plan.

D. Project Objectives

The project objective is to develop a multi-phase construction project using context sensitive

design that will improve the geometric and operational deficiencies that negatively affect safety in the project area.

The primary objective of the first phase of the project is to develop improvements that will

improve the geometric and operational deficiencies of NY 17 EB and WB to allow Interstate 86 designation for this portion of NY 17. Another objective of the first phase of the project is to eliminate the structural deficiencies of the bridges that carry NY 17/I-81 over the Chenango River by replacing them with structures that are based on current design standards, which provide adequate capacity over the design life of the structure.

The primary objective of the second phase of the project is to provide transportation improvements

that will reduce or eliminate the potential of vehicular conflict/accidents and improve safety conditions at identified problem locations between the NY 17/I-81 Interchange and the eastern/southern project limit.