DOCSLIB.ORG

Van Schaick Island Transportation and Revitalization Plan Final Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Van Schaick Island Transportation and Revitalization Plan Final Report Van Schaick Island Transportation and Revitalization Plan Final Report May 2008 Prepared for: Capital District Transportation Committee Prepared by: Van Schaick Island Transportation and Revitalization Plan Final Report May 2008 Acknowledgements/SAC Mayor John T. McDonald, III – City of Cohoes Melissa Ashline-Heil – City of Cohoes Edward Tremblay – City of Cohoes Mark Defruscio – City of Cohoes James Weir – City of Cohoes Jason Purvis – Capital District Transportation Committee Susan Olsen – New York State Department of Transportation Michael Wyatt – New York State Department of Transportation David Gehrs – Capital District Transportation Authority Michael Francini – Albany County All the members of the Van Schaick Island and Simmons Island communities, as well as Common Council Members, that participated in the public workshops. Creighton Manning Engineering | Kise Straw & Kolodner Page ii Van Schaick Island Transportation and Revitalization Plan Final Report May 2008 Table of Contents Page Title Page........................................................................................................................ i Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................ ii Table of Contents...........................................................................................................iii List of Figures .................................................................................................................v List of Tables ..................................................................................................................v List of Appendices...........................................................................................................v Executive Summary ........................................................................................................vi I. Introduction.............................................................................................................. 1 A. Overview.............................................................................................................. 1 B. Study Area & Regional Setting .............................................................................. 1 C. History & Relevant Efforts .................................................................................... 3 D. Study Goals ......................................................................................................... 3 E. Approach............................................................................................................. 3 II. Existing Conditions................................................................................................... 4 A. General Environment ........................................................................................... 4 1. Zoning............................................................................................................ 4 2. Land Use ........................................................................................................ 6 3. Historic Character and Institutions.................................................................. 7 4. Recreation ...................................................................................................... 7 5. Projects Approved/Under Construction........................................................... 8 6. Gateways...................................................................................................... 10 7. The Streetscape ............................................................................................ 10 8. Environmental Constraints............................................................................ 11 B. Transportation................................................................................................... 11 1. Traffic Conditions and Operations ................................................................ 11 2. Primary Intersections .................................................................................... 11 3. Traffic Volumes ............................................................................................ 12 4. Pedestrian Accommodations......................................................................... 13 5. Bicycle Accommodations .............................................................................. 13 6. Transit.......................................................................................................... 14 C. Island Positives .................................................................................................. 16 D. Public Comments – Workshop #1 ....................................................................... 16 III. Land Use Alternatives.............................................................................................. 17 A. Development Alternative 1................................................................................. 18 B. Development Alternative 2................................................................................. 20 C. Development Alternative 3................................................................................. 22 IV. Transportation Plans............................................................................................... 27 A. Governing Principles .......................................................................................... 27 B. Transportation Management Plan....................................................................... 27 Creighton Manning Engineering | Kise Straw & Kolodner Page iii Van Schaick Island Transportation and Revitalization Plan Final Report May 2008 C. Multi-Modal/Transit Plan.................................................................................... 34 1. Bicycle Accommodations .............................................................................. 34 2. Transit.......................................................................................................... 36 3. Pedestrian Accommodations......................................................................... 38 D. Enhancing Island Positives ................................................................................. 38 E. Public Comments – Workshop #2 ....................................................................... 39 V. Implementation....................................................................................................... 40 A. Costs ................................................................................................................. 40 B. Financing........................................................................................................... 41 C. Timing............................................................................................................... 42 VI. Environmental Justice.............................................................................................. 42 VII. Conclusion.............................................................................................................. 43 Creighton Manning Engineering | Kise Straw & Kolodner Page iv Van Schaick Island Transportation and Revitalization Plan Final Report May 2008 List of Figures Page Figure I.1 – Study Area ...................................................................................................2 Figure II.1 – Existing Zoning (updated in 2006) ..............................................................5 Figure II.2 – Current Projects ..........................................................................................9 Figure II.3 – Regional Bike-Hike Trails...........................................................................15 Figure III.1 – Development Alternative 1 .......................................................................19 Figure III.2 – Development Alternative 2 .......................................................................21 Figure III.3 – Development Alternative 3 .......................................................................24 Figure III.4 – Eastbound Ontario Street Before & After...................................................25 Figure III.5 – Westbound Ontario Street Before & After..................................................26 Figure IV.1 – Area-Wide Transportation Improvements..................................................32 Figure IV.2 – Corridor-Specific Transportation Improvements .......................................33 Figure IV.3 – Proposed Bicycle Route ............................................................................35 Figure IV.4 – Potential Transit Routes ...........................................................................37 List of Tables Table V.1 – Recommendations and Costs .....................................................................41 List of Appendices Appendix A........................................................................ Public Workshop Summaries Appendix B ......................................................................... CDTC Environmental Justice Creighton Manning Engineering | Kise Straw & Kolodner Page v Van Schaick Island Transportation and Revitalization Plan Final Report May 2008 Executive Summary The City of Cohoes and the Capital District Transportation Committee (CDTC) are sponsoring the development of a Van Schaick Island Transportation and Revitalization Plan. The purpose of the Plan is to ensure that growth along Ontario Street reflects the vision for
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cohoes-Waterford Concept Plan.Pub
    Cohoes—Waterford Canalway Trail Connection Study Prepared for New York State Canal Corporation By Parks and Trails New York Final Draft Version Cohoes-Waterford Canalway Trail Connection Study Final Draft Version September 2004 Page 2 Table of Contents Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................ 2 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................ 3 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 5 Existing trail initiatives in the study area ...................................................................... 6 Purpose of Study .......................................................................................................... 7 Inventory and Analysis of Study Area ................................................................................. 7 Canalway Trail Resources ........................................................................................... 7 Waterford Canal Harbor Visitor Center ........................................................................9 Hudson Valley Greenway Trail ...................................................................................10 Street System Resources ................................................................................................. 11 Streets .......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Community Relations Plan
    f COMMUNITY RELATIONS PLAN HUDSON RIVER PCB REASSESSMENT RI/FS EPA WORK ASSIGNMENT NO. 013-2N84 DECEMBER, 1990 c»o REGION II ALTERNATIVE REMEDIAL CONTRACTING STRATEGY (ARCS) FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE REMEDIAL SERVICES 3B » ^ EPA Contract No. 68-89-2001 o TAMS CONSULTANTS, Inc. u> 00 77 TAMS CONSULTANTS, INC. COMMUNITY RELATIONS PLAN HUDSON RIVER PCB REASSESSMENT RI/FS Contents Page 1. OVERVIEW OF THE COMMUNITY RELATIONS PLAN 1 2. SITE BACKGROUND 3 2.1 Site and Problem Description 2.2 Site History 3. AREA PROFILE 9 3.1 Geographic Characterization 3.2 Land Use, Facilities, and Lifestyle 4. COMMUNITY RELATIONS/PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROFILE 12 4.1 History of Community Involvement 4.2 Key Concerns and Anticipated issues 5. OBJECTIVES AND DESCRIPTION OF THE COMMUNITY INTERACTION PROGRAM (CIP) FOR THE HUDSON RIVER PCB REASSESSMENT RI/FS 16 5.1 Program Objectives 5.2 Program Description 6. COMMUNITY RELATIONS/PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ACTIVITIES 22 6.1 Basic Community Relations Activities 6.2 CiP-Specific Community Relations/Public Participation Activities 6.3 Optional Community Relations/Public 0 Participation Activities ^ o o CO (O HR-PCB.CRP/CONTENTS TAMS CONSULTANTS, INC. COMMUNITY RELATIONS PLAN HUDSON RIVER PCB REASSESSMENT RI/FS Appendices Page Appendix A Section 1 Governmental Liaison Group Committee Participation Mailing List 27 Section 2 Governmental Liaison Group Information Mailing List 35 Section 3 Citizen Liaison Group Committee Participation Mailing List 47 Section 4 Citizen Liaison Group Information Mailing List 54 Section 5 Environmental
    [Show full text]
  • Restorative Environments Through Holistic Sensory Impressions
    With all my senses: Restorative environments through holistic sensory impressions by Brid Sona A thesis presented to the University of Hohenheim in partial fulfillment of the thesis requirement for the degree of Doctor rerum socialium (Dr. rer. soc.) in Psychology Supervisor and primary reviewer of the doctoral thesis: Prof. Dr. Anna Steidle Secondary reviewer of the doctoral thesis: Prof. Dr. Sabine Trepte Chair of the defense: Prof. Dr. Marion Büttgen Dean of the Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences: Prof. Dr. Karsten Hadwich Submitted on 14.07.2017 Thesis defense on 07.11.2017 1 Acknowledgments Acknowledgments I would like to acknowledge the contribution of my supervisor, Prof. Dr. Anna Steidle, for her support and commitment throughout all stages of my thesis. We learned together to manage stressful days with a lot of humor and serenity, without losing sight of the essentials. Thank you so much for this experience! In addition, sincere thanks go to Prof. Dr. Sabine Trepte, the secondary reviewer of my doctoral thesis. Thank you for your interest in my work! I would also like to express my appreciation to Prof. Dr. Lioba Werth, who gave me the opportunity to be part of the interdisciplinary research team ‘People Inside’ and the chair of Industrial and Organizational Psychology at the University of Hohenheim. Without her support, this doctoral thesis could not have been achieved. Thank you very much indeed! Special thanks go to my awesome colleagues at the University of Hohenheim and the Graduate Program ‘People Inside’ for the scientific exchanges and countless hilarious lunches. I definitely learned what it means to share responsibility and that I can always rely on your encouragement.
    [Show full text]
  • IOB Evaluations
    IOB Evaluation | no. 324 IOB Evaluation | no. The economic and social infrastructure of many least developed countries is severely inadequate or even non-existent. One reason for this is the difficulty in obtaining long-term capital for IOB Evaluation investment in infrastructure. That is why the Dutch Minister for Development Cooperation established the Least Developed Countries (LDC) Infrastructure Fund in 2002. The Fund, which is managed by the Netherlands Development Finance Company (FMO), aims to stimulate private investment in infrastructure in LDCs. This report presents the results of an evaluation of the Fund’s first five years. Investing in infrastructure Policy and Operations Evaluation Department | IOB Evaluations | no. 324 | July 2009 | Policy and Operations Evaluation Department | IOB Evaluations | no. 324 | July 2009 Policy and Operations Evaluation Department | IOB Evaluations | no. 324 | July 2009 | Policy and Operations Evaluation Department | IOB Evaluations | no. 324 | July 2009 | EvaluationEvidence of the fromLDC Infrastructure developing Fund countries Investing in infrastructure Published by: Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands P.O.Box 20061 | 2500 eb The Hague | The Netherlands www.minbuza.nl © Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands | July 2009 | OSDR/6642/E AbuDhabiAbujaAccraAddisAbebaAlgiersAlmatyAmmanAnkaraAntwerpenAsmaraAstanaAtheneBagdadBamakoBangkokBarcelonaBeiroetBelgradoBerlijnBernBoedapestBoekarestBogotáBrasiliaBratislavaBrusselBuenosAiresBujumburaCairoCanberraCaracasChicagoColomboCotonouDakarDamascusDarEsSalaamDenHaagDhakaDohaDublinDüsseldorfFrankfurt/MainGenèveGuangzhouGuatemalaHamburgHanoiHarareHavanna
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 Annual Report
    Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor t 2016 Annual Report 2016 Annual Report Annual e love the story of the Erie Canal: Building the Future its heroic engineering and Wconstruction; its hard-working laborers; its visionary leaders; its transfor- mative impact on New York and the nation. Wrapped in the history of the Erie Canal is the story of America itself: a nation that imagined big, pursued a bold agenda, and persevered to achieve greatness. At the end of the day though, the story resonates only if it rings true. The story lives on if we envision how this iconic waterway will serve the next century and if we are the architects and laborers that build the canal’s future. That is what we strive to do every day at the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor. Drawing from the canal’s playbook and our own award-winning Established in 2000 management plan, we are championing by an Act of Congress, the Corridor’s distinctive sense of place the Corridor spans 524 miles across the and protecting its heritage resources. full expanse of upstate We are working to maximize recreational New York. It includes the opportunities for those who live here and Erie, Cayuga-Seneca, for visitors from afar. And we are fostering Oswego, and Champlain economic sustainability and vibrant canals and their historic communities connected by our treasured alignments. The waterways. Corridor encompasses Together with our partners and thousands 4,834 square miles in of people across the state and nation who 23 counties and is home care deeply about this place, we are making to 3.2 million people.
    [Show full text]
  • TROY's SACRED FOREST
    TROY’s SACRED FOREST Its culture, ecology, history, archaeology, and signifi cance to the community. TROY’s SACRED FOREST Its culture, ecology, history, archaeology, and significance to the community. SPECIAL THANKS TO THE compiled and published by MEMBERS OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, AND CONTRIBUTORS The Friends of the Mahicantuck www.save1011.org Leo Matteo Bachinger, PhD (Environment, Climate, Community Development) [email protected] Jessica Bennett (Neighbor, Friends of the Mahicantuck) Dr. Brandon Costelloe-Kuehn (Science, Technology and Society, Sustainable Design) and submitted for consideration to Dr. David Hunt (Ecology) Mayor of the City of Troy, Patrick Madden James Kruegler (Water Resources) President of the City Council of Troy, Carmella Mantello Sarah Pezdek (Friends of the Mahicantuck) Planning Commissioner of the City of Troy, Steven Strichman Hined Rafeh, MS (Public Health & Policy) The Members of the Troy City Council Prof. Don Rittner (Archaeology) The Members of the Planning Commission Bethany Yarrow (Waterfall Unity Alliance) January 22, 2021 Troy, NY COVER LETTER Dear Mayor Patrick Madden, With this report, the Friends of the Mahicantuck provide “Lost opportunity costs” must be expected particularly Over 2300 signatures to our petition, more than eight hours City Council President Carmella Mantello, comprehensive analysis of the signifi cance of the “Sacred regarding the development of the city’s vacant housing stock. of testimony against the rezoning at three public hearings, as Members of the City Council, Forest” located at 1011 2nd Avenue. We provide an assessment Allowing for high density development on this undeveloped well as countless written submissions show that your Planning Commissioner Steven Strichman, of adverse impacts associated with the potential change in site would signifi cantly impact Troy’s capacities to develop its constituents are united across party-lines in opposition to and Members of the Planning Commission, zoning code as well as potential development of the site.
    [Show full text]
  • Planning Commission 433 River St., Ste
    Wm. Patrick Madden Steven Strichman Mayor Commissioner of Planning Monica Kurzejeski Phone: (518) 279-7166 Deputy Mayor [email protected] Planning Commission 433 River St., Ste. 5001 Troy, New York 12180 Meeting Minutes January 28th, 2021 @ 6:00 pm The Planning Commission of the City of Troy, New York conducted a public hearing on Thursday, 28 January, 2021 at 6:00pm via Zoom Conferencing, in order to hear and decide on proposals for development as follows: 6:00pm – Meeting called to order Commissioners in Attendance Deirdre “Dede” Rudolph (DR), Anthony Mohen (AM), Sara Wengert (SW) Commissioners Absent Suzanne Spellen (SS), Barbara Higbee (BH) Also in Attendance Andy Brick (Planning and Zoning Attorney), Aaron Vera (Executive Secretary) Consent PLPC 2021 0001 – St. Peter’s Parish at 5th and Hutton (101.30-8-32 & 101.30-8-33) Change of Use (SEQR Type II) (101 .30-8-32) Renovate an existing 6-unit residential building (rectory) into an 8-unit apartment building. Existing footprint to remain. (101 .30-8-33) Renovate an existing 3-unit apartment building. Existing footprint to remain. • Applicant Presentation. • BH in attendance. • Request for public comment. No comment. • SS in attendance. • AM motion to approve, SW seconded. Absent Yes No Abstain Recused Deirdre Rudolph X Sara Wengert X Suzanne Spellen X Barbara Higbee X Anthony Mohen X Motion to approve passed, 5-0. Page 1 of 4 City of Troy Meeting Minutes Planning Commission 28 January, 2021 Old Business PLPC 2020 0046 – 770 Pawling Ave. (112.84-4-2) Site Plan Review (Type II SEQR) J & J Apartments, LLC is proposing to occupy an existing commercial space with three (3) residential units.
    [Show full text]
  • Military History of the Van Schaick Mansion
    Military History of the Van Schaick Mansion The Van Schaick Mansion was built in 1735 by Goosen Geritge Van Schaick. Its island location and geographic position along the Hudson River between New York City and Canada made it an ideal military stronghold, so the house was used as a military headquarters in the French and Indian wars of 1735 and again in the American Revolution from 1777 until the early 1780s. Alongside the river was the main road for north-south travel, used originally by Algonquian Indians and later by both British and Continental troops; a portion of it is the present-day Continental Avenue in Cohoes. The Mohawk River was the main route for travel going east and west. In the summer of 1777, the British plan was to break the colonies in half by taking control of New York to defuse the American Revolution. New York, near the middle of the 13 colonies and with 40% of its population supporting the English, would be the easiest state to control. English General Howe had taken control of NYC early on in the war. Both English Generals St. Ledger and Burgoyne were sent to Canada. The plan was that Howe would come north up the Hudson River, Burgoyne would come south down the Hudson River, and St. Ledger would travel east along the Mohawk River. The three armies would meet at Van Schaick Island, do battle and thereby take control of New York State. Gen. Phillip Schuyler, the descendant of the original business partner of Goosen Van Schaick, was in charge of the Northern Territories and was stationed on Van Schaick Island.
    [Show full text]
  • Cohoes DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION INITIATIVE June 2018
    City of Cohoes DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION INITIATIVE June 2018 rising from the ashes Cohoes on the Move Table of Contents Basic Information ....................................................3 Vision ......................................................................3 Justification ............................................................4 Downtown Identification 1. Boundaries of the Proposed DRI Area ..................... 7 2. Description of the Catchment Area ......................... 9 3. Past investment, Future Investment Potential ........ 11 4. Recent or Impending Job Growth ............................ 13 5. Attractiveness of Physical Environment .................. 14 6. Quality of Life Policies .............................................. 18 7. Public Support .......................................................... 23 8. Project List to Demonstrate Readiness .................... 26 9. Administrative Capacity ........................................... 30 10. Other ........................................................................ 32 a. Regional Location Map ................................ 32 b. Local Location Map ...................................... 33 c. Letters of Support ........................................ 34 2 City of Cohoes Basic Information Regional Economic Development Council (REDC): Capital Region Municipality Name: City of Cohoes Downtown Name: Cohoes DRI District County: Albany Vision Centered on Remsen Street, and bounded by the Mohawk River, Historic Downtown Cohoes is a vibrant center for people
    [Show full text]
  • Downtown Revitalization Initiative
    DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION INITIATIVE – CREDC The Capital Region Economic Development Council (CREDC) is accepting applications from qualified applicants for the Downtown Revitalization Initiative (DRI). Please refer to the attached Downtown Revitalization Initiative Guide for further information on the DRI program. Each applicant must complete this application and include the requested Appendices. Applicant responses for each section should be as complete and succinct as possible. Applications must be received by Empire State Development’s Capital Region Office by 4:00 p.m. on June 1, 2016. Applications are to be submitted by email to [email protected]. Files should be named in the following format: “Downtown_Municipality_Date”. If you have questions about the Downtown Revitalization Initiative, contact the ESD Capital Region Office at (518) 270-1130. BASIC INFORMATION Regional Economic Development Council (REDC) Region: Capital Region Municipality Name: City of Cohoes Downtown Name: Downtown Cohoes County: Albany Point of Contact: Michael Jacobson Title: Director of Economic and Community Development Phone: 518-233-2117 Email: [email protected] Downtown Description: Provide an overview of the downtown and summarize the rationale behind nominating this downtown for a DRI award: Please refer to the attached application package for responses. 1 DOWNTOWN IDENTIFICATION This section should be filled out with reference to the criteria set forth in the DRI Guidelines. 1) Boundaries of the Downtown Neighborhood. Detail the boundaries of the targeted neighborhood, keeping in mind that there is no minimum or maximum size, but that the neighborhood should be compact and well-defined. Core neighborhoods beyond a traditional downtown or central business district are eligible, if they can meet other criteria making them ripe for investment.
    [Show full text]
  • 2008 Annual Report New York State Thruway Authority /Canal Corporation
    2008 ANNUAL REPORT NEW YORK STATE THRUWAY AUTHORITY /CANAL CORPORATION I. THRUWAY AUTHORITY The Thruway Authority (“Authority”) is a public corporation organized and existing pursuant to Article 2, Title 9 of the New York State Public Authorities Law for the purpose of financing, constructing, reconstructing, improving, developing, maintaining and operating a highway system known as the Governor Thomas E. Dewey Thruway. The powers of the Authority are vested in and exercised by a seven-member Board appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the State Senate. The Thruway is a 570-mile superhighway system crossing the State. It is the longest toll superhighway system in the United States. The Thruway route from the New York City line to the Pennsylvania line at Ripley is 496 miles long and includes the 426-mile mainline connecting the State’s two largest cities, New York City and Buffalo. Other Thruway sections make direct connections with the Connecticut and Massachusetts Turnpikes, New Jersey Garden State Parkway and other major expressways that lead to New England, Canada, the Midwest and the South. In 1991, the Cross-Westchester Expressway and in 1992, I-84 were added to the Thruway System. The Authority operated and maintained I-84 through October 2007 at the Authority’s expense. In October 2007, the Authority returned responsibility for I-84 to the New York State Department of Transportation (“NYSDOT”). However, pursuant to an agreement between the Authority and NYSDOT, the Authority currently continues to perform operation and maintenance of I-84 on behalf of NYSDOT at NYSDOT’s expense. In all, the Thruway (without I-84) is comprised of 2,818 lane miles of roadway, 806 bridges, more than 350 office and maintenance buildings, 27 travel plazas, 275 toll booths, nearly 120 water services, 18 water waste treatment plants and 26 motor fueling stations for Authority vehicles and equipment.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Plan & Regional Project Awards
    Strategic Plan & Regional Project Awards Governor Andrew M. Cuomo 10 Regional Councils Long Island: Nassau, Su!olk New York City: Bronx, Kings, New York, Queens, Richmond Mid-Hudson: Dutchess, Orange, Putnam, Rockland, Sullivan, Ulster, Westchester Capital Region: Albany, Columbia, Greene, Rensselaer, Saratoga, Schenectady, Warren, Washington North Country: Clinton, Essex, Franklin, Hamilton, Je!erson, Lewis St. Lawrence Mohawk Valley: Fulton, Herkimer, Montgomery, Oneida, Otsego, Schoharie Central New York: Cayuga, Cortland, Madison, Onondaga, Oswego Southern Tier: Broome, Chemung, Chenango, Delaware, Schuyler, Steuben, Tioga, Tompkins Finger Lakes: Genesee Livingston, Monroe, Ontario, Orleans, Seneca, Wayne, Wyoming, Yates Western New York: Allegany, Cattaraugus, Chautauqua, Erie, Niagara Statewide Chairman’s Committee Western New York $100.3 million awarded to 96 projects Region County Applicant Project Title Description Agency Total CFA Award Western NY Allegany Alfred University High Temperature Complete the High-Temperature Materials ESD $2,800,000.00 Laboratory Characterization Laboratory, initially created in cooperation with Corning Inc., but now providing a number of industries across New York State with high-temperature analytical and characterization services including Corning, General Electric, Delphi, Lockheed Martin, Saint Gobain, as well as several smaller companies. Western NY Allegany Allegany County WNY Regional Develop a Regional Sustainability Plan for NYSERDA $998,224.00 Sustainability Western NY that will establish a sustainability Planning Program baseline including inventories of greenhouse gas emissions and energy use. The plan will assess sustainability indicators including economic assets, liabilities and opportunities as well as transportation, land use, and natural resources. The plan's long-term and short- term goals will address improving energy e!ciency, promoting renewable energy, and reducing carbon emissions.
    [Show full text]