Corridor Strategic Plan Study Activities...corridor through technological and regulatory...

Study Activities

Parsons-Clough Harbour Page 2-1

Corridor Strategic Plan

NYS Department of Transportation

2.0 STUDY ACTIVITIES

This section describes the various activities carried out during each phase of the Study, as well the public outreach activities that were ongoing throughout the Study.

2.1. Public Outreach

2.1.1. Study Advisory Group and Stakeholder Involvement

Phase I of the Study began with the formation of the project’s Study Advisory Group (SAG), which played a critical role throughout the Study. Its members – representatives of State, Quebec and local agencies, US and Canadian federal inspection agencies, local chambers of commerce, economic development agencies, and other key groups – provided access to information, data, and local insights about critical transportation and economic development issues of importance to communities and businesses along the corridor. The Study Team also reviewed preliminary results with the SAG at key junctures in the Study, with the SAG commenting on everything from draft reports to technical or policy proposals involving the corridor.

An extensive stakeholder outreach program was developed in coordination with the SAG to obtain a better understanding, at the corridor and community level, of present corridor conditions. These stakeholders helped to define the linkages between the transportation network and local economic development and quality of life, and the transportation needs of greatest importance to communities along the corridor. The stakeholder outreach effort involved four meetings with the SAG itself, a series of Economic Zone Meetings held in various locations along the corridor, six Technical Workshops with stakeholders involved in the day-to-day implementation of programs being considered, and a number of smaller meetings with State and county agencies, business and economic development organizations, elected officials and other interest groups along the corridor.

Economic Zone Meetings. At the outset of the I-87 Multimodal Corridor Study, the Study Team divided the corridor into three economic zones (Northern, Central, and Southern), based on economic and geographic similarities. A series of meetings was held between March and September 2003 with representatives of each of these zones to collect information regarding the region’s economic development and demographic trends and projections, key growth sectors, and economic growth constraints, as well as to identify the most important transportation initiatives needed to support each zone’s growth goals. The Study Team also participated in a meeting of the Quebec-New York Corridor I-87 Corridor Economic Zones

Northern Zone

Southern Zone

Central Zone

Study Activities

Parsons-Clough Harbour -2



Coalition, which includes representatives of NYSDOT, the Quebec Ministry of Transportation (MTQ), the New York State Thruway Authority, Transport Canada, the Capital District Transportation Committee (CDTC), the Adirondack-Glens Falls Transportation Council, and other transportation and economic development organizations and agencies within the Study Corridor. These economic zone meetings identified both near- and long-term improvements that would foster development for key business sectors along the corridor, and many non-transportation needs, such as the need for water, sewer, and high-speed telecommunication connections, were also identified.

Economic zone meetings were held in the following locations:

• Northern Zone (Clinton, Essex, Warren, and Washington counties):

o Plattsburgh o Lake Placid o Glens Falls

• Central Zone (Albany, Rensselaer, Saratoga, and Schenectady counties):

o Albany

• Southern Zone (Columbia, Dutchess, Greene, and Ulster counties1):

o Poughkeepsie o Catskill

Technical Workshops. Six Technical Workshops held in February and March 2004 provided the Study Team with additional input and guidance from SAG members and from stakeholders involved on a day-to-day basis with the programs, issues and concerns that were being discussed. These informal, roundtable discussions helped the Study Team to prioritize and refine the Phase II Smart Concepts being advanced as part of this study, as well as to further develop the long-term vision for the I-87 corridor.

These stakeholder meetings and workshops also helped the Study Team to identify and refine the corridor transportation needs that this Strategic Corridor Plan would ultimately be created to address. The results of this needs identification process are discussed in Section 2.3 below.

2.1.2. Public Outreach Materials

In addition to the various stakeholder meetings held throughout both phases of the Study, the public was kept informed and involved in the process through a range of programs and media. Four Fact Sheets were developed to concisely present Study activities and milestones, and two newsletters provided a more detailed look at the Study’s activities and findings. An additional newsletter focusing solely on the High-Speed Rail Pre-Feasibility Study completed during Phase I (see below) was developed jointly by NYSDOT and MTQ to convey to 1 Orange, Putnam, Rockland, and Westchester counties were not included in the southern zone because these areas are the focus of the ongoing I-287/Tappan Zee Bridge Corridor Study.

Technical Workshop Meeting

Study Activities




the public the recommendations issued by the agencies as a result of rail studies on both sides of the border. Finally, the Study’s website – dotweb2.dot.state.ny.us/i87study/ – contains an overview of the project’s purpose and structure, allows users the opportunity to comment on the Study, and provides links to all of the reports, newsletters, and fact sheets published over the course of the Study, as well as to minutes and presentations from each of the stakeholder meetings. Copies of these outreach materials are included in Appendix B of this report.

2.2. Phase I Activities

In addition to the formation of the SAG and implementation of various outreach activities, the following activities were completed during Phase I of the Study:

• Establish Goals and Objectives. An important initial task for the Study Team was to establish the overall Goals and Objectives for the Study to help shape and establish the direction of the Study, and to provide a basis for selecting projects or programs on which the corridor should focus its attention. As shown in Table 2-1, the Goals and Objectives represent the transportation, economic development, and environmental enhancement areas that the Study was intended to address, along with the environmental and related constraints with which any identified actions should comply.

• Collect Transportation and Economic Data. With these goals in place, the Study Team collected data from a wide range of existing Federal, State, and local sources, including transportation, demographic, and economic development databases and past and on-going transportation planning and engineering studies. This included existing infrastructure conditions and demand levels on all modes in the corridor – highway, rail, waterborne, aviation, public transportation, etc. – as well as demographic and economic profiles of communities along the corridor.

• Establish Existing Conditions and Develop “Long List” of Improvements. Based on these activities, the Study Team developed a detailed profile of existing transportation network conditions in the corridor, in all key modal areas, and the relation between transportation services and economic vitality and quality of life in communities along the corridor as well as Statewide. A “long list” of improvements to meet the corridor’s existing and future needs was then established. This included a broad range of concepts – from actions by NYSDOT and other agencies that are already in various stages of planning, development or implementation, to innovative concepts not presently being pursued by any agencies or organizations. This Long List, presented in greater detail in the I-87 Multimodal Corridor Study Long List of Improvement Concepts (October 2003), included improvement concepts in the areas of:

o Highways and Bridges o Rest Area Network and Truck Facilities o Rail Networks and Operations o Aviation Facilities and Operations o Inter- and Intra-city Public Transportation o Waterborne Network and Port Facilities o US-Canada Border Crossing o Intelligent Transportation Systems/Commercial Vehicle Operations o Intermodal Facilities and Operations

Study Activities




Table 2-1

Study Goals and Objectives Goal 1. Enhance person and goods movement and intermodal operations.

Objectives: 1-1. Maintain reliable and consistent traffic operations throughout the Corridor. 1-2. Minimize delay to persons and goods movement. 1-3. Enhance non-highway travel. 1-4. Improve intermodal and multimodal connections. 1-5. Develop cost-effective improvements to the existing transportation network

and intermodal facilities. 1-6. Expedite efficiency of Quebec-New York border crossings and the overall

corridor through technological and regulatory improvements.

Goal 2. Support corridor-wide and regional sustainable growth and economic development. Objectives: 2-1. Accommodate anticipated economic activity in the corridor. 2-2. Ensure consistency of transportation actions with economic development

actions and with relevant regional and local plans. 2-3. Enhance connectivity and access to major industrial, commercial and

recreational sites. Goal 3. Promote safety and security.

Objectives: 3-1. Improve passenger and freight transportation safety throughout the corridor 3-2. Improve security for freight and passenger movements in the corridor.

Goal 4. Protect and enhance the region’s environmental and quality of life

conditions. Objectives: 4-1. Minimize adverse impacts from transportation actions and from the use of

transportation facilities and services in the corridor. 4-2. Protect unique environmental resources, including the Adirondack Park. 4-3. Use transportation actions to enhance important environmental features. 4-4. Support sustainable forms of development and the attainment of “Quality

Communities” objectives throughout the Corridor.

Study Activities




Appendix C presents a series of maps which show the distribution of these projects along the corridor.

Phase I culminated with the development of this list of potential transportation improvements for the corridor, along with the more comprehensive report, I-87 Multimodal Corridor Study Existing Conditions and Opportunities (May 2004). From this list, the Study Team, working with the SAG and others, selected a group of projects on which the Study Team could focus in greater detail in Phase II of the Study. Further details on the Long List and on the selection of Phase II projects are presented later in this section.

• Complete High-Speed Rail Study. Another significant activity that occurred concurrently with Phase I of the Study was the High-Speed Rail Pre-Feasibility Study: New York City to Montreal (“HSR Study”) published in February 2004. Completed in cooperation with MTQ, the HSR Study looked at the viability of true European-type high-speed service (150+ mph throughout) in the corridor. It focused on the section of the New York-Montreal corridor between Albany and the US-Canada border. MTQ looked at similar HSR service over the portion of the corridor between Montreal and the US-Canada border. The remaining New York State segment from New York City to Albany is part of the Empire Corridor already designated as a HSR Corridor, and has been addressed by previous and on-going projects and studies.

The HSR Study concluded that although the development of high-speed rail service in the corridor would be both technically feasible and effective in reducing travel time, the cost of these improvements would be exceedingly high. Full 150 MPH HSR service between New York City and Montreal could reduce rail travel time between these two cities from the present 10:15 hours to 4:05 hours; however, the capital costs to implement this type of service would be approximately $4 billion for the 191-mile segment between Albany and Rouses Point, and approximately $80-110 million (US dollars) for the Rouses Point-to-Montreal portion of the corridor. The cost of additional rolling stock is not included in this estimate.

The HSR Study also evaluated the potential of several more modest improvements along the Albany-to-Montreal corridor to provide substantial travel time savings and improve reliability at considerably lower costs. The Study found that the time savings and costs of various incremental improvements, versus Full 150 MPH service, indicate that especially in the near-term, it would be worthwhile to pursue an incremental approach to service improvements to obtain more immediate results. Therefore, given Full HSR’s multi-billion dollar cost and lengthy (10+ year) implementation time, and the corridor’s

Study Activities




environmentally sensitive Adirondack Park location, rail passengers would be better served by incremental improvements implemented in stages.

Based on these findings and those of MTQ’s equivalent studies, New York State and Quebec have identified approximately $40 million in infrastructure improvements between Albany and Montreal, although their feasibility and economic benefit require further investigation. These improvements would reduce the 7:30-hour travel time between the two cities by roughly 2 hours. An additional 1-hour improvement would be possible if all Customs activities were handled at the Montreal station in the same manner as airline travel, eliminating the long delays for passengers at the border under present Customs arrangements.

2.3. Identification of Corridor Needs

Based on input from various stakeholder discussions and analysis performed by the Study Team, an inventory of corridor needs was compiled during Phase I and refined during Phase II. Due to the broad design of the Study in terms of both geographic area and subject matter, the resulting analysis was more broad-based compared to the detailed assessments typically performed for more traditional corridor studies. The various needs identified in this chapter are not intended as a laundry list of spot-specific problems along the corridor. Instead they represent a broad collection of needs that, if targeted, would enable the corridor to better respond to and reap the opportunities of changing economic forces and trends.

Figure 2-1 shows the overall Primary and Secondary Study Areas for these efforts. Similar but distinct Primary and Secondary study areas were developed for each of the modes that were analyzed in the study – vehicular, rail, marine, and air traffic. Each modal study area incorporates all of the facilities and operations in rough proximity to the I-87/Autoroute 15 highway corridor that are relevant to that mode, and although the specific transportation facilities included in each study area necessarily varies by mode, the corridor’s highways and major roadways are used as the frame of reference to describe their boundaries; i.e.:

• Vehicular Traffic Study Areas – the Primary Study Area includes I-87 between Interchange 21A, just south of Albany, and the Northway terminus at the Champlain border crossing, as well as major intersecting highways. The Secondary Study Area includes the corridor portion to the north and south of the Primary Study Area, from the Tappan Zee Bridge to Interchange 21A and along Autoroute 15 in Quebec from the border crossing to Montreal.

• Rail Passenger and Freight and Intermodal Study Areas – the Primary Study Area includes rail links between the Capital District and the US-Canada border at Rouses Point, including the Plattsburgh intermodal yard; as with vehicular traffic, the Secondary Study Area encompasses the area south of the Primary Study Area to New York City and the area north of the border to Montreal, including the CSX lines on both sides of the Hudson River.

• Marine Traffic Study Areas – the Primary Study Area also focused on the central and northern portions of the corridor, from the City of Hudson near Interchange 21 of the New York State Thruway to the northern tip of Lake Champlain at the Canadian border. Within that area, the Study focused on commercially navigable waterways, the Port of Albany, and potential intermodal sites at intersections of the Hudson River and major highways, rather than Lake Champlain and the Barge Canal System, which are used

Study Activities


Corridor Strategic PlanNYS Department of Transportation

Figure 2-1 Project Study Areas

Study Activities




primarily for recreation. The Secondary Study Area includes the Hudson River from the southern end of the Primary Study Area to New York City.

• Aviation Study Areas – the Primary Study Area includes all commercial and general aviation facilities between Albany and the US-Canada border, as well as Stewart International Airport in Orange County. The Secondary Study Area for aviation includes general aviation facilities between New York City and the Capital District.

The following sections summarize, by transportation mode, the findings of this effort and their relationship to the overall goals and objectives that guided the Study.

2.3.1. Highways and Bridges

During Phase I, the Study Team gathered and evaluated a wide variety of existing data (traffic volumes, congestion and accident data, bridge conditions, and clearances, etc.) from various transportation agencies and related reviews of past and on-going transportation studies. These data were used to provide an initial assessment of the overall condition and serviceability of the roads and bridges within the corridor.

Within the overall corridor, the Study Team mainly focused on the Primary Study Area, from Thruway Interchange 21A, just south Albany, to the Lacolle/Champlain crossing at the US-Canada border. The Primary Study Area also includes Route 9 between Albany and the U.S./Canada border and Route 22 from the Capital District to the border, as well as critical east-west connectors within the Primary Study Area such as I-90, Route 149, and Route 73. Conditions in the Secondary Study Area (Autoroute 15 in Quebec and the NYS Thruway from Interchange 21A to the eastern side of the Tappan Zee Bridge) were also assessed. In general, needs within the Secondary Study Area are generally being addressed under numerous separate and well-defined initiatives and programs.

Using the information that was collected from the various sources for the Primary Study Area, the Study Team identified those areas of improvement with greatest importance to the corridor’s highway network. This effort was coordinated with the needs assessments already carried out through traditional transportation planning activities – i.e., NYSDOT’s own Capital Improvement Programs, the equivalent programs from the NYS Thruway Authority, and Transportation Improvement Programs of corridor MPOs.

Pavement surface conditions along the entire I-87 corridor are generally good to excellent, with only a few areas (mostly in the Primary Study Area) rated as fair. However, the underlying pavement structure along I-87 within the Capital District will require major reconstruction within the upcoming years. Bridges within the I-87 corridor are generally in fair (39 percent) or good (52 percent) condition, with only 40 of the 460 bridges within the primary and secondary study areas assessed as being in poor condition. Nearly three-quarters of the 162 bridges that cross over I-87 were constructed prior to implementation of the current vertical clearance standard of 16.5 feet and do not meet this standard. This problem is typically not addressed until the structure is scheduled to be replaced as part of NYSDOT’s or Thruway Authority’s capital

Northway “Twin Bridges”

Study Activities




program, due to the high cost. Within the next ten years the existing Capital Programs for the Primary Study Area have identified more than ten major pavement projects totaling more than 100 miles and more than 25 major bridge projects, one of which is the I-87 crossing of the Mohawk River between Albany and Saratoga Counties.

Excluding traditional pavement and bridge deficiencies, which are addressed through the on-going capital programming process (as referenced above), the primary highway and bridge needs identified by the Study Team are:

• Commuter Capacity and Traffic Congestion between the Capital District and Central Saratoga County. The deficiencies in the Capital District focused primarily on commuter capacity and congestion on I-87 and its impacts on mobility and the ability of this key region to respond to economic growth possibilities and competition from other areas across the country and worldwide. Also cited as critical was the integration of ITS improvements to better accommodate the increasing demand within each of the competing user markets and offset the need for large-scale capacity improvements.

• Coordinated Operation and Management of the Interstate and Primary Arterial System within the Capital District. The effectiveness of I-87 and the adjoining Interstates (I-90 and I-787) and primary arterials (Route 9, Route 7, Route 5) is limited by the inability of these highways and roads to function as a coordinated network that can respond effectively to peak traffic congestion or incidents.

• Improved Safety at the Approach to the US-Canada Border. The prevalence of traffic queues extending onto I-87 from the border crossing and the occurrence of vehicular accidents attributable to high-speed traffic encountering unexpected traffic stoppages is an impediment to the safety and efficiency of the corridor users as they approach or depart the border facilities.

• Access, Capacity and Safety at Key Non-Interstate Roadways and Connections to I-87. A particular emphasis was identified in the southern and central Adirondack Regions where these deficiencies have the greatest impact on maintaining, supporting and expanding tourism and other economic development opportunities. A frequently noted theme was that existing interchanges and local access networks such as Route 73 and Route 149 carry significantly higher volumes of traffic than the systems can effectively accommodate. In the Adirondack areas, steadily increasing commercial

Bridge Sufficiency Ratings

Study Activities




and recreational traveler volumes often compete with commuter, shopping, and other local traffic, resulting in congestion and limiting access to important commercial areas. The high-growth areas of Saratoga County also need improved access to key planned development areas for their full potential to be realized.

• Increased Access to Tourist and Recreation Attractions. The need for increased access to the area’s tourist and recreation attractions via automobile, as well as by rail and air, was a focus in the Northern Economic Zone, including the potential for transit connections between train stations, airports, and tourist and convention destinations like Lake Placid. Limitations on tourism-related travel were also cited as problematic in the Glens Falls region, where the frequent competition between tourist and commercial and industrial traffic is an issue. The need for dedicated ski buses and better signage to promote the Catskill region’s recreation assets was also discussed.

2.3.2. Rest Area Network and Truck Facilities

A similar effort was undertaken to evaluate corridor needs related to the network of rest areas and truck facilities along I-87. Using information collected from State agencies and other corridor stakeholders, as well as NYSDOT’s 1999 Statewide Rest Area Plan, the Study Team identified those areas of improvement to the rest area network, including truck parking and related facilities, with the greatest importance to passenger and truck freight movements in the corridor. These needs include:

• Expanded Commercial Vehicle Parking and Services at Rest Areas. Congestion at rest areas and truck stops has become a serious problem for truckers along interstates throughout the country, including those along the I-87 corridor. Drivers are forced to either merge back onto the highway in search of another facility or park illegally along exit ramps. Commercial vehicle operators not only require safe and legal places to park for rest periods during long hauls, they also need amenities and services such as rest room facilities, showers, telephone/telecommunications, food services, and eating areas, which are lacking at many rest areas within the corridor.

• Improved Traveler Information and Amenities. A number of rest area facilities in the Corridor do not provide the diversity of services included in modern Interstate highway rest areas across the country. These services include (1) information (traveler, tourist, points of interest, weather, food and lodging), (2) telecommunication connections, (3) adequate and well-lit parking areas, entrances and facilities, (4) safe and sanitary rest rooms, and (5) food services as allowed by regulation. Of particular relevance to the Northway portion of the corridor, there is a lack of on-highway multi-lingual signage to inform and direct travelers to rest areas.

• Provision of Permanent Truck Inspection Facility on Southbound I-87 near the US-Canada Border. A permanent inspection facility south of the Champlain/Lacolle border crossing is a critical need. Currently, inspections are conducted at rest areas or comfort stations that have limited on-site capabilities or provisions for commercial vehicle detention or impoundment. The use of rest areas for this function is also problematic in that it further mixes commercial vehicles with passenger vehicles. The Champlain/Lacolle crossing is one of ten sites included on NYSDOT’s “target list”—and the only one located within the I-87 corridor—of permanent inspection facility sites that would handle complete vehicle screening, including weight

Study Activities




inspections and driver and safety inspections. Further details on the commercial vehicle operations (CVO) needs in the corridor, and how NYSDOT and other agencies plan to address them, are presented in Section 2.3.8.

• Correct Inconsistent Spacing and Long Distances Between Facilities. Although there are no mandated criteria for rest area spacing along an Interstate, the accepted industry practice is that rest areas be spaced consistently and at an interval of approximately 50 to 70 miles. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides further recommendations that spacing on the Interstate system be reduced to between 20 and 35 miles. The actual recommended spacing depends on whether traveler services are also readily available at highway exits. In combination with convenient off-highway services, a series of regularly spaced rest areas ensures that the services necessary for the safe and convenient movement of people and goods are provided along the entire length of a corridor.

In the segment of the I-87 corridor between Glens Falls and the US-Canada border, both rest area spacing and accommodations vary considerably. Some facilities are closed, some provide only the most basic, utilitarian comfort station, and others, such as the High Peaks Rest Area, are newly constructed, full-service facilities with modern amenities. The spacing of the facilities in this segment is also inconsistent; some facilities are as little as 12 miles apart, while in other areas, spacing in excess of 35 miles is common.

2.3.3. Rail Networks and Operations

The railroad rights-of-way and infrastructure throughout most of the Study Area are owned and operated by private freight railroad companies such as Canadian Pacific (CP) Rail Systems and CSX Transportation, with the exception of a large section of track owned by MTA Metro-North Railroad south of Poughkeepsie. Passenger rail service in the Study Area is provided by public operators (e.g., Amtrak, Metro-North), who have operating agreements with the freight railroads to run passenger trains on their lines for annual fees. As a variety of other studies were already focusing on rail network conditions south of Albany and within Quebec, the Study Team’s assessment of the corridor’s rail network

Primary Rail Study Area

NYSDOT Rest Area

NYSTA Rest Area

Corridor Rest Areas

Study Activities




and services focused mainly on the Primary Study Area between Albany and the Canadian border.

The Study Team collected and evaluated a variety of data from transportation authorities and railroad owners and operators, from whom the Study Team also sought help in identifying and validating the corridor’s most critical rail network needs. Concurrent with Phase I of the I-87 Multimodal Corridor Study, the Study Team completed an assessment of the potential for high-speed rail service between New York City and Montreal. The main purpose of this study, the results of which were presented in the February 2004 HSR Study, was to determine the feasibility of full HSR service in the corridor. However, it also helped the Study Team identify needed improvements to the existing passenger rail infrastructure in the corridor, especially between Albany and Rouses Point. Many of the needs and recommendations from the HSR study are also relevant to the assessment of freight service needs in the corridor.

The most prominent need within the rail sector was to improve the overall reliability of the system. Although much of the rail network is generally in good condition, there are a limited number of readily definable elements that impair the system’s overall performance and reliability. The primary railroad network needs identified by the Study Team and validated by the railroad owners and operators were:

• Key Maintenance Upgrades. The HSR study concluded that making a relatively small number of important maintenance upgrades (e.g., replace jointed rail with continuous welded rail (CWR), tie replacements, rail resurfacing, etc.) at critical locations along the CP Rail Canadian Mainline is the most important need in the corridor. The “slow orders” in these areas, caused by poor track conditions, signal system breakdowns, and other problems, cause extensive delays for both passenger and freight trains.

• System Capacity Improvements. Most of the rail network in the Primary Study Area is a single-track system, which requires a series of passing sidings long enough to permit one train to allow a second train to pass in order for freight and passenger service to jointly use the single-track system. Of the nine sidings along the CP Rail Canadian Mainline corridor, only four (the Ballston, Saratoga, Whitehall, and Plattsburgh sidings) are at least 10,000 feet, the length required for a 100-car unit train to meet and pass. However, passenger and freight conflicts currently exist at two key locations: Fort Ticonderoga, which has a siding length of 4,900 feet, and the US-Canada border at Rouses Point, with a siding length of 5,800. If freight and passenger rail operations in the corridor were increased, the sidings at Ft. Edward (9,700’), Wadhams (5,800’), and Howards (8,000’) would also require expansion. Therefore, the lack of passing sidings (or areas of double track) within the Study Area creates daily congestion and a lack of reliability along the current system and is a major deterrent to the future expansion of freight and passenger service.

To fully realize the benefits of capacity improvements (e.g., passing sidings, track bed improvements, etc.), increases in maximum allowable speeds for trains on the system must be allowed. Permission under Federal Railway Administration (FRA) regulations to reach maximum speeds of up to 79 mph would make important time savings possible for passenger trains. For operating speeds above 79 mph, however, FRA regulations mandate the installation of upgraded “fail-safe” signal systems, which are designed to eliminate the hazardous effects of a failure of a component of the signal system or the

Study Activities




system as a whole, in all trains operating along that line. This would require a significant upgrading of the existing track systems and associated locomotives.

• Connectivity Improvements. Another improvement area that would expedite rail traffic movements in the study area, particularly on the freight side, would be the construction of key connections between existing rail lines. By building track connections at strategic locations – for instance, in the vicinity of the Selkirk Yard in Albany County and the Mohawk Yard in Schenectady County – many high-priority freight movements could bypass switching yards and other congested areas and continue unimpeded to their final destination. This is particularly important for intermodal shipments that need to be time-sensitive to compete with over-the-road shippers.

• Limitations on the Use of Double Stack Trains. A minimum clearance of 21’6” is required at all tunnels and overpasses in order to operate double stack trains along a rail corridor (22’ is the preferred minimum clearance for double stack corridors). Clearance restrictions at nine tunnels and bridges (Whitehall Tunnel, Clinton Street overhead bridge, Fort Ticonderoga Tunnel, an overhead signal bridge, Willsboro Tunnel, and four through truss bridges) currently preclude the use of double stack trains along the corridor. However, these clearance restrictions are programmed for correction in 2005.

2.3.4. Aviation Facilities and Operations

Phase I of the Study involved a detailed overview of the setting, facilities, and activity levels of commercial and general aviation in the corridor, including the four commercial service airports (with passenger airline service) in the corridor and ten general aviation airports in or near the corridor. That effort involved meetings between the Study Team and airport personnel, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and NYSDOT, as well as reviews of various airport master plans and related aviation studies. These initial studies investigated and summarized the status of:

• Current airport projects and proposed improvements;

• FAA and NYSDOT funding and ongoing projects;

• Ground access and planned improvements;

• Activity levels and forecasts; and

• The market or service area of each airport.

Most of the airports in the Corridor (with the exception of South Albany, Round Lake and Westport) are included in FAA’s National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS), and are therefore eligible to receive Federal and state funding for airport projects. These “system airports” are quite diverse, ranging from Albany International, which serves three million annual passengers, to unattended municipal airports in the Adirondacks with single runways and limited facilities.

Several aviation sector needs were identified through the Study Team’s baseline assessment of aviation services and discussions with the airports’ operators and communities. The input helped the Study Team better understand how well the airport system serves the corridor, as well as its shortcomings. The general areas of need include the following:

Plattsburgh International Airport

Study Activities




• Control of Approach Surfaces (airspace obstructions) and Non-standard Conditions at General Aviation Facilities. New satellite-based approach procedures using Global Positioning Systems (GPS) are being developed by the FAA and implemented at airports throughout the country. These new instrument landing procedures improve airport safety and capability by enabling more accurate approaches to landing in poor weather conditions (e.g., low clouds and visibility). However, some general aviation airports throughout the corridor, including Westport and Schroon Lake airports in Essex County, have had difficulty in clearing obstructions such as trees and other objects beneath the final approach paths to runways, which is required to take advantage of this technology. The lack of property ownership, access, and environmental issues, especially given these airports location within the Adirondack Park, have made it difficult to take advantage of these new approach procedures.

Many of the corridor’s general aviation facilities also require improvements such as runway and taxiway extensions and parallel taxiways to increase their competitiveness for business aircraft. Some of these needs could potentially be addressed under NYSDOT’s planned State Airport Improvement and Revitalization (AIR 99) program, which is intended to advance strategic investments in general aviation airports that may not receive funding under FAA’s Airport Improvement Program.

• Support for Expansion of Scheduled Airline Service. Currently, Clinton County Airport offers limited scheduled commuter service (several flights per day) under the FAA-administered Essential Air Service (EAS) program. The EAS program provides a per passenger subsidy to the airlines for providing commuter service to small communities located more than 70 miles from other commercial airports. Clinton County has formal plans to consolidate the aviation activity of Clinton County Airport and Plattsburgh International Airport. Plattsburgh International has extensive airside capability and substantial landside assets and can accommodate any type of aviation use. This plan also enables the complete redevelopment or sale of the Clinton County Airport property for non-transportation purposes.

The expansion of Plattsburgh International Airport provides the opportunity for the Airport and Clinton County to attract new, low-cost airline service to the Plattsburgh area, as well as the potential to capture a portion of the Montreal and Burlington markets. Other similar airports – both joint-use military airports (e.g., Niagara Falls) and former Air Force bases (e.g., Pease International Tradeport in Portsmouth, NH) have attracted commercial airline service, with mixed results. With numerous variables and external factors (e.g., border crossings, ferry service to Burlington, airline economics, etc.), the future of airline activity at Plattsburgh International is very difficult to forecast. However, special assistance in facility improvements and marketing will likely be needed for the successful redevelopment of Plattsburgh International Airport.

• Improved Ground Access to Airports. Both Albany International Airport and Stewart International Airport are in the process of expanding passenger service, and improvements to roadway and transit access to both airports would help to meet increased demand at these facilities. A highway project that would provide a direct interchange to Stewart International Airport has already been designed; however, construction is on hold due to legal issues. The scoping phase has been completed and preliminary alternatives identified for a similar project at Albany International Airport,

Study Activities




Schroon Lake Airport

but the project’s design has not been completed, nor has a preferred alternative been identified. The need for improved transit or shuttle connections between airports, train stations, and tourist and convention destinations like Lake Placid was also identified as important, especially in the northern portion of the corridor.

• Basic Facilities at Adirondack Park Area Airports. The two small unattended airports in Essex County – Schroon Lake and Ticonderoga – have constructed modern runways through the FAA Airport Improvement Program. However, given the small size of the communities served by these airports, providing some important basic airport services has been cost prohibitive to date. Fly-in visitors to these communities are not provided with any airport services (e.g., flight planning/communication capability, fuel service, rest rooms, etc.). The lack of these services hinders the growth of aviation activity in this portion of the corridor.

2.3.5. Intercity and Intra-city Public Transportation

Phase I of the Study involved a review of existing intercity bus service along the corridor and intra-city (local) bus service in larger urban areas such as the Capital District. It also identified trends that could influence future capital and operational investment decisions. The Study Team compiled and reviewed available reports, held stakeholder interviews, collected transit operating data, and reviewed its initial findings with the SAG. The potential for high-speed rail passenger service in the New York-to-Montreal corridor was also analyzed in the February 2004 HSR study (see Section 2.2 above).

The primary needs and key improvement areas identified by the Study Team are:

• Planning for Employment and Population Growth Hubs. As the Capital District continues to attract high-tech and biotech businesses to the corridor, additional or expanded transit services would provide greater accessibility to new development centers such as the Luther Forest project in Saratoga County. The expanded services would allow a wider range of potential employees to access these new development areas and reduce the impact of new developments on the regional highway network.

• Multimodal Connections to Recreation and Tourism Destinations. Transit connections linking train stations and airports to major recreation, tourism, and convention destinations such as Lake Placid are limited. Providing transit connections would offer alternatives to private autos for access to these resources and help to bolster the corridor’s tourism economy. Improved intercity air service, via both general aviation airports (for private

Access to Recreational Attractions in Greene

County

Study Activities




planes) and commercial airports (for scheduled service) would help improve the competitiveness of these areas for tourism, corporate retreats and other uses.

• Transit Access to Stewart International Airport. Stewart International Airport is presently expanding scheduled passenger service, yet has few transit connections to major population centers. Providing better transit connections to Stewart, especially by linking into the MTA Metro-North and NJ Transit networks to the south, would help to support the development of another important full-service airport in the New York/New Jersey area, reduce congestion at existing airports (e.g., LaGuardia, JFK, and Newark Liberty), and support economic growth in this portion of the study corridor.

• Transit Improvements to Address Mobility Needs and Congestion in the Capital District. The I-87 corridor between Saratoga County and Albany is severely congested during peak hours, and existing transit service along this section of the corridor is limited. No regular commuter rail service currently exists within the Capital District, and the consensus of stakeholders interviewed by the Study Team was that full-scale, independent commuter rail service in the Capital District had long-term merit but insufficient demand in the near-term to offset the substantial capital and operating costs it would require. However, the moderate infrastructure improvements and service modifications identified to upgrade Amtrak long-distance passenger rail service and to support freight rail service in the corridor could also support passenger rail service opportunities between Saratoga County and Albany. Travelers that utilize Amtrak’s Adirondack and Ethan Allen lines to make commuter-type trips between Saratoga and Albany would help improve traffic flow in the most congested portion of the Primary Study Area.

Mobility within the Capital District would also be improved through a better link between the Albany-Rensselaer Amtrak station and the Capital District Transportation Authority (CDTA) transit system. Although two CDTA bus routes (#14 and #24) currently make regular stops at the station and connect to downtown Albany, their service schedules are not coordinated with the Amtrak schedule, and neither route serves growing employment centers to the west of downtown Albany. Expanding service to and from the station and revising schedules to better serve passengers transferring between bus and rail would help to increase transit ridership and improve mobility within the Capital District.

2.3.6. Waterborne Network and Port Facilities

The Study Team’s analysis of the corridor’s waterborne network and port facilities focused on the commercially navigable and functional sections of waterways in the vicinity of the I-87 Corridor, rather than those, such as Lake Champlain and the Barge Canal System, which are utilized primarily by recreational users and mostly closed for five months out of the year. The selection of critical analysis areas was driven by economic activities and trends in the shipping industry, the present condition and operational abilities of the waterborne system’s physical infrastructure, and existing or potential linkages to multimodal or economic activity nodes. Based on these criteria and input from the SAG and other stakeholders, two critical analysis areas for waterborne transportation were identified within the corridor: the Port of Albany (including the Rensselaer side), and sections of the Hudson River, south of Albany to the City of Hudson and, to a lesser degree, the area immediately north of Albany.

Study Activities




The Port of Albany is the major marine center for regional business and industry in Upstate New York. Located centrally along the I-87 corridor, it has three surface transport modes in place (rail, interstate highway, and twice-a-week scheduled container barge service) that make it a natural multi-modal logistic center. Although outside of the Primary Study Area, the Port of Montreal, located on the St. Lawrence River, is an integral component of the corridor’s transportation network. It is also essential to the corridor economy, with much of the port’s containerized cargo destined for or coming from US markets in the Northeast. Due to its proximity to the I-87 corridor, the volume of corridor highway truck traffic it generates, and the potential for growth in rail freight business if rail network improvements were made, the Port of Montreal and its continued growth are important to the I-87 corridor.

The primary waterborne freight needs relate to two critical waterborne facilities in the Primary Study Area:

• Facility Upgrades at the Port of Albany. The Port of Albany’s master plan, Port 2000: Expanding the Reach of the Port of Albany/Rensselaer, already addresses many of the necessary upgrades to Port facilities that are beyond their service life expectancy or that limit Port capacity and operations. The serviceability of the Port could be improved by replacing outdated wharf structures, providing additional state-of-the-art marine yard facilities adjacent to active berths, adding refrigerated storage capabilities to capture the refrigerated container cargo market share, providing a mobile container crane, and converting a portion of the wharf structure to support roll on/roll off vessels and automobile vessel ramps. While security has been improved greatly at the Port, continuing upgrades will be necessary given the need to implement national and international security requirements and regulations.

• Hudson River Navigational Channel Improvements. Both the width and depth of sections of the Hudson River channel between Coxsackie and Albany are below accepted maritime standards, and portions of the channel north of Albany are not maintained to the minimum standard depth of 13 feet. These substandard conditions impede waterborne traffic in both directions and limit opportunities for future expansion of waterborne freight operations in the study corridor.

2.3.7. US-Canada Border Crossing

As part of the Phase I assessment of border crossing facilities and operations, the Study Team:

• Reviewed a number of available reports, including the 1998 Northern New York Border Crossing study and the 2002 study Truck Freight Crossing the Canada-United States Border;

• Interviewed key stakeholders, including NYSDOT, MTQ, US Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the Canadian Border Services Agency, Canadian Pacific Railway, and Canadian National Railroad; and

Port of Albany

Study Activities




• Conducted a supplemental origin and destination study of customers crossing the border in August 2003.

These data collection and outreach efforts helped the Study Team to better understand the current activities and operations at the border crossing, as well as those that are being planned for the proposed “Port of Excellence” gateway project described in Section 3.2.4 of this report.

In addition to the ongoing development of the Port of Excellence, the primary border crossing needs identified by the Study Team are:

• Expansion of Existing Border Crossing Programs. The Free and Secure Trade (FAST) and NEXUS pre-clearance programs, which provide expedited border crossing for pre-screened, low-risk commercial and passenger vehicles, are both in their early stages of implementation at the Champlain-Lacolle border crossing. Continued marketing and funding of these programs would further improve safety, security, and efficiency on both the northbound and southbound sides of the border crossing.

A Safe and Secure Transporation System demonstration program has also been proposed to assess ways to take advantage of the increased use of security and inventory-tracking systems implemented by private shippers to increase the effectiveness of the homeland security and truck inspection programs of CBP and NYSDOT, respectively. A successful program of this type, which is discussed briefly in Section 3.2.7 and presented in greater detail in I-87 Multimodal Corridor Study: Technical Memo #4: Smart Corridor Projects (July 2004), would help improve conditions at this border crossing and provide benefits that would be transferrable to other crossings in the State and nationwide.

• Border Traffic Safety. The prevalence of extensive traffic queues and long delays on approaches to the border crossing is a critical issue on both sides of the border. Drivers approaching the border on northbound I-87 and southbound Autoroute 15 lack up-to-date, real-time traveler information about the length of border delays and queuing conditions at the border plaza. Improved queue detection systems and multi-lingual variable message signs (VMS) are needed to alert drivers to potentially dangerous conditions ahead.

• Expedited Railroad Passenger Customs Checks and Clearances. As mentioned in Section 2.2, current passenger rail service is hindered by the excessive delays required to complete Customs checks at the border, with passengers typically waiting an hour or more in a stopped train for the process to be completed. Both the HSR Study and the equivalent study completed by MTQ propose that Customs operations for rail passengers at this crossing be performed in Montreal, thereby avoiding this en route delay.

2.3.8. ITS/CVO

One key use of Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) technology in the corridor is to disseminate travel and traffic information to users, be they recreational travelers, commuters, or commercial drivers. There are a number of ITS traveler information and CVO initiatives on-going throughout New York State, with many of them in various stages of deployment along the corridor. For instance, VMS and highway advisory radio (HAR) are used to inform travelers along much of the corridor, and a queue detection and warning system is in place northbound on I-87 at the US-Canada border. A transportation management center in Albany monitors

Study Activities




traffic on the interstate highways in the Capital District and advises motorists and media organizations of conditions. NYSDOT has implemented an Information Exchange Network (IEN) to allow agencies to share information on transportation network conditions statewide. In the field of CVO, separate programs such as One-Stop Credentialing and Registration (OSCAR) and North American Preclearance and Safety System (NORPASS) are currently in operation. Also, NYSDOT is developing an electronic credentialing information system called the Commercial Vehicle Information System that will enhance interagency communication.

Nevertheless, several critical ITS and CVO needs in the corridor were identified that would improve the manner in which information is relayed to travelers:

• Coordination and integration of systems, standards, and protocols between all agencies affiliated with the corridor. Existing ITS and CVO programs have evolved into their current state through the efforts of numerous federal, state, and local agencies. This has resulted in an ad hoc system comprised of a diverse range of components, limiting the overall effectiveness of these tools to manage the corridor as a whole. The State’s IEN program now provides a common platform for disseminating information. Expansion of the IEN to encompass more systems and agencies is critical and is needed to take full advantage of initiatives recommended by this Study.

• Expanded coverage of systems to provide corridor users with accurate and dynamic condition information. The corridor has a limited amount of existing infrastructure in place to provide real-time and accurate traffic and incident management information. Such a system is critical if users are to develop enough confidence in the timeliness and accuracy of these systems to utilize them as intended.

• Coordinated operation and management of the Interstate and primary arterial system within the Capital District. Other than the I-87/I-287 corridor at the southern end of the Study Area (being extensively studied by the NYSTA), the only area in the corridor with regular and extensive highway congestion problems is the Capital District. In the Capital District the effectiveness of traffic management actions would be enhanced if the ITS systems were expanded to cover the broader network of highways adjoining the interstate highways. This need for more comprehensive network management was identified by the Study Team as part of its assessment of highway conditions, and ITS programs are seen as the primary way to address it.

• Deployment of wireless telecommunications to provide seamless coverage along the entire length of the corridor. The lack of adequate telecommunications infrastructure between Northway exits 26 and 35 in the central Adirondacks segment of the corridor is a public safety and economic development concern. This gap in telecommunications coverage also presents a major roadblock to implementing corridor-wide ITS solutions. The operation and maintenance of a seamless telecommunications system is paramount to the success of technology-reliant ITS and CVO initiatives.

• Development of integrated CVO inspection capabilities at strategic locations along the corridor. The inability to support manual inspection efforts with electronic screening capabilities (e.g., weigh-in-motion, NORPASS), and the lack of dedicated facilities which can effectively accommodate the CVO inspection and enforcement efforts presents a public safety, as well as homeland security, concern within the corridor.

Study Activities




2.3.9. Intermodal Facilities and Operations

Intermodal activities involve the transfer of goods or commodities from one form of transportation to another within a delivery or distribution network. Within the Study Area there are a number of existing intermodal facilities, involving the transfer of goods between rail and truck, rail and ship, and ship to truck.

In the I-87 corridor, the primary intermodal activities involve the transfer of goods between rail and truck. Issues of intermodal operations involving air-to-truck connections at Stewart and Albany International Airports were also examined, although existing conditions and future needs at those facilities are the subject of extensive on-going studies and (in the case of Albany International) capital improvement programs.

In order for the Study Team to determine the need for improved intermodal capabilities in the corridor, two elementary questions required answering:

(1) What are the rail infrastructure conditions in the corridor that define its effective capacity and limit the potential for greater rail-based intermodal activity, and

(2) What are the conditions in the existing intermodal yards, and is there sufficient market demand to warrant major investments in those facilities or the development of a new regional intermodal facility, most likely within the Capital District.

Rail infrastructure needs in the corridor are discussed in Section 2.3.3 above. The answer to the intermodal market question was addressed by a preliminary market needs analysis conducted during Phase II of the Study. This market analysis found that the market potential for intermodal transfer operations in the Capital District, whether at a new regional facility or an enhanced existing facility, would not be substantially higher than the current volume of operations at the Kenwood Yard, located within the Port of Albany and adjacent to I-787 in Albany. This level of demand did not justify building a new intermodal facility in the Capital District; however, the analysis did reveal that expansion of the existing Kenwood Yard facility could increase intermodal transfer operations significantly. The existing Kenwood Yard has a number of deficiencies – including a lack of parking and storage space, inadequate lighting, poor and limited access to the highway network, and operational problems during winter weather – which have inhibited the capability of any meaningful growth in demand at the facility. Therefore, the primary objective with regard to intermodal facilities and operations in the corridor is to increase the capacity and productivity of the Kenwood Yard terminal to support the continued economic viability of the intermodal freight market in the Capital District.

2.4. Phase II Activities

Figure 2-2 presents an overview of how the Phase I activities were tied into the Phase II study activities. The primary goal of Phase II was to develop a corridor vision and strategic implementation plan. As a precursor to Phase II, the Study Team screened the Long List Report improvement concepts for candidates to be further analyzed for engineering and technical feasibility and environmental compatibility. To facilitate this process, the 80-plus Long List concepts were organized in terms of the four transportation markets—Commuter, Intercity, Freight, or Recreation. The concepts were then initially ranked based on:

• Consistency with the study goals and objectives;

Study Activities




Figure 2-2: Corridor Improvement Concept Packaging and Selection Process

Environmental Assessment

Preliminary Engineering Technical Workshops

Technical Feasibility

Smart Corridor Projects

• ITS/CVO • I-87 TMC

• Luther Forest Connector • Capital District Intermodal • Northway Operational

Improvements • Recreation Services • HSR/Commuter Rail

Corridor Vision

Tasks • Form SAG

• Set Goals and Objectives

• Identify Corridor Needs

Long List Report • 80+ Projects

• Initial Rankings • Screening Process

HSR Pre-Feasibility Study • Evaluate HSR Service (150 mph+)

• Incremental Improvements

• Smart Highways • Smart Public Transportation

• Smart/Safe Traveler • Smart Freight

STRATEGIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

Projects Already Being Advanced or Studied

Improvement Packages Other Identified Concepts

Phas

e I

Phas

e II

Study Activities




• Effectiveness in addressing needs for its assigned travel market;

• Potential for contributing to the development of I-87 as a “Smart Corridor;” and

• Input from SAG members, including a compilation of members’ individual rankings.

The concepts were then further screened to determine potential constraints that would prevent the Study Team from completing a meaningful assessment of the concept within the time and budget limitations for Phase II. The potential constraints considered included:

• If the concept was already under study or in early stages of design, by either NYSDOT or another transportation agency;

• Significant political, regulatory, or fiscal hurdles that would cause the analysis to exceed the allotted time frame for Phase II; and

• If the concept consisted of key components that would require significant research that would eclipse the Phase II deadline.

Table 2-2 presents the results of initial ranking and the constraints assessment. The most promising projects for further Phase II analysis were grouped into one of seven “Improvement Packages”:

• ITS/CVO Operations

• I-87 Corridor-wide Transportation Management

• Luther Forest Access Improvement

• Capital District Intermodal Operations

• Northway Operational Improvements

• Recreation Services

• High Speed Rail/Commuter Rail Potential

Each Improvement Package was the subject of an individual technical workshop (as noted in the public outreach summary presented earlier) to further refine the individual elements of the improvement concepts and the overall package. The packages were then analyzed for engineering and technical feasibility and environmental compatibility.

Development of the Corridor Strategic Plan. The ultimate product of Phase II of the Study is this Corridor Strategic Plan, which defines how all of the improvement concepts identified over the course of the Study – including those not selected for detailed development during Phase II – fit together to form an overall vision for the I-87 corridor. The remainder of this report presents this plan, and the steps that would have to be taken in order to realize it.

Study Activities




Table 2-2: Concept Package Ranking Matrix

Primary Goals & Travel Smart SAG PackageMarket Objectives Market Corridor Ranking Potential

High Connectivity "Package" Potential = Focus Needs Concepts

PACKAGE #1: ITS/CVO

ITS-6 Coordinated Commercial Vehicle ID/Screening F

ITS-9 Electronic Data Distribution System (Fiber Optic Trunk Line) I,R,F

B-2 FAST and NEXUS Marketing I,F

ITS-11 Supply Chain Container Security & Tracking Systems F

R-14 Vertical Array Cargo Inspection System F

PACKAGE #2: I-87 TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT CENTER

ITS-13 I-87 Transportation Management Center C,F,I,R

ITS-7 Statewide Wireless Communication System C,F,I,R

PACKAGE #3: LUTHER FOREST CONNECTOR

H-5 Luther Forest Technology Campus Access C

IP-1 Luther Forest Technology Campus TDM C

PACKAGE #4: CAPITAL REGION INTERMODAL

I-1 Capital Region Intermodal Distribution Center F

R-9 CP Rail Clearance Improvements F

R-12 CP Canadian Mainline Signal Improvements I,F

R-13 CP Rail Track Rehabilitation I,F

I-5 Commercial Vehicle Trailer Parking Lot/Staging Area F

I-6 Selkirk Intermodal Yard F

PACKAGE #5: NORTHWAY/CAPITAL DISTRICT

ITS-2 Integrated Incident Management System C

ITS-3 Advanced Cell Phone Communication Service I,R

ITS-5 Traveler Information Kiosks I,R

ITS-10 HOT Lanes in Congested Highway Segments C

ITS-12 Traveler Information System: Albany-Saratoga Commuter Shed C

IP-4 Bus Rapid Transit in Capital Region C

H-4 Adirondack Northway (Saratoga Co. thru Capital District) C

ITS-8 Call Box Replacement & Expanded Cell Phone Service I,R

ITS-14 US Route 9 ITS Improvements C

Market Codes: C= Commuter; I=Intercity; R=Recreation; F=Freight

CONCEPTS PROPOSED FOR INCLUSION IN PHASE 2 PACKAGES

= Low = Medium = High

Study Activities




Table 2-2: Concept Package Ranking Matrix (continued)



PACKAGE #6: RECREATION SERVICES

H-3 NYS Route 73 R

IP-2 Transit Connection at Westport/Lake Placid Amtrak Station R

PACKAGE #7: HSR/RAIL COMMUTER SHED

R-12 CP Canadian Mainline Signal Improvements I,F

R-13 CP Rail Track Rehabilitation I,F

H-1 Interchange 3 Airport Connector I,C

H-2 Albany Corridor Study C

H-9 Port of Excellence Improvements I,F

H-10 Tappan Zee Bridge/I-287-I87 Corridor Study C,I,F,R

A-2 New Terminal at Plattsburgh International I,R

A-3 Replace Basic General Aviation Facilities at Plattsburgh International I,R

A-4 Retain Subsidized Air Service at Plattsburgh I,R

A-7 Improve Airfield at Schroon Lake R

A-8 Construct General Aviation Facilities at Schroon Lake R

A-9 Construct General Aviation Facilities at Ticonderoga R

A-11 Extend Runway 19 at Albany International I

A-12 Expand Terminal and Air Cargo Facility at Albany International I,F

A-14 Extend Runway 34 at Stewart International I,F

A-15 Construct Corporate Aviation Facilities at Schenectady County Airport I

B-1 Port of Excellence Project I,F

I-3 Plattsburgh Intermodal Facility F

I-4 Intermodal Transportation Concept Plan F

IP-3 Transit Access to Stewart Airport I

H-6 Access Improvements to SUNY Technology Hub C

H-7 Northway Interchange 18 C

H-8 Rtes 4, 9 & 149 from Northway Interchange 20 to Vermont State Line R,F

H-11 Selkirk Yard Access Improvements F

CONCEPTS BEING ADVANCED OR STUDIED BY NYSDOT OR OTHERS

OTHER SHORT-/LONG-TERM STRATEGIC PLAN CONCEPTS

Market Codes: C= Commuter; I=Intercity; R=Recreation; F=Freight= Low = Medium = High

Introduction and Overview




Table 2-2: Concept Package Ranking Matrix (continued)



H-12 Commercial Vehicle Access Improvements to the Port of Albany F

ITS-1 Fixed Automatic Spray Technology - Emergency Fog Alert System I,R

ITS-4 RBDS/RDS Radio-Based Communication I,R

W-1 Port of Albany: Security System Upgrades F

W-2 Port of Albany: Wharf Upgrades F

W-3 Port of Albany: Marine Yard Upgrades F

W-4 Port of Albany: Refrigerated Storage Capabilities F

W-5 Port of Albany: Container Handling Operations F

W-6 Port of Albany: Roll On/Roll Off Loading and Unloading Capabilities F

W-7 Hudson River Navigational Channel Improvements North of Coxsackie to Port of Alba F

W-8 Hudson River Navigational Channel Improv. North of Albany to St. Lawr. River F

A-1 New General Aviation Airport, Essex County I,R

A-5 Acquire Westport Airport R

A-6 Improve Runways at Westport Airport R

A-10 Extend Runway at Glens Falls I,R

A-13 Expand/Replace Terminal Building Facilities at Stewart International I,F

A-16 Hangar Facilities at Lake Placid & Adirondack Regional Airports I,R

A-17 Hangar Facilities at South Albany Airport R

R-1 CP Canadian Main Line - Double Track I,F

R-2 CP Rail Freight Mainline - Double Track I,F

R-3 CP Colonie Mainline - Double Track I,F

R-4 CSX River Subdivision-Double Track Ravena to Coxsackie I,F

R-5 CSX NE Wye Connection F

R-6 CSX Hudson Subdivision - Double Track Rensselaer to Schenectady I,F

R-7 Amtrak Scotia Connection - Schenectady Station I,F

R-8 Saratoga Yard Improvements I,F

R-10 Cabbage Island Branch F

R-11 Saratoga-Albany Commuter Rail Service C,I

RA-1 Rest Area Network Improvements I,F,R

RA-2 Truck Stop Electrification F

I-2 Expansion of Kenwood Yard F

Market Codes: C= Commuter; I=Intercity; R=Recreation; F=Freight= Low = Medium = High

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Corridor Strategic Plan Study Activities...corridor through technological and regulatory...

Documents

Transcript of Corridor Strategic Plan Study Activities...corridor through technological and regulatory...