June 2009 FINAL DESIGN REPORT PIN 9067.17
CHAPTER 2 - PROJECT CONTEXT: HISTORY, TRANSPORTATION PLANS, CONDITIONS AND NEEDS
This chapter addresses the history and existing context of the project site, including the existing conditions, deficiencies, and needs for this part of the NYS Route 17 corridor. Any context sensitive conditions/needs will be briefly discussed in Section 2.3.4 Landscape and Environmental Enhancement Opportunities and more in-depth in Chapters 3 and 4 of this report.
2.1. Project History
NYS Route 17, within the project limits, is a four lane divided highway. This section of highway was originally constructed in the late 1950’s under State administered Federal Aid Reconstruction Contracts, FARC 57-42 and FARC 55-42. The structure was originally constructed in 1953 under FARC 50-52 and is listed as eligible for the historic register based on its unique use of a Warren truss structure below deck rather than the more common Warren through truss.
NYS Route 17 was designated for inclusion in the Interstate System as part of the High Priority Corridor 36 portion of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) legislation in 1998. In 1999, NYSDOT initiated two studies to evaluate the existing condition of NYS Route 17 within Region 9. The first study entitled “NYS Route 17 (Future Interstate 86) Interchange Spacing and Geometrics’ Study” identified existing nonstandard features based on Interstate standards. The second study entitled “NYS Route 17 (Future Interstate 86) Bridge Vertical Clearance Study” evaluated existing structures over NYS Route 17 and identified the modifications necessary to meet Interstate vertical clearance standards. These reports were commissioned as part of the prerequisite to NYSDOT requesting FHWA approval to designate NYS Route 17 as Interstate 86. These reports also served as a planning guide for future projects by NYSDOT.
Based on Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) review, portions of NYS Route 17, including the project area in Sullivan County, contain nonstandard/nonconforming highway features that need to be addressed prior to designating it as an Interstate.
The NYS Route 17 Interstate upgrade involves roadway improvements and the addition of Interstate signs to NYS Route 17 from the New York-Pennsylvania state line to its intersection with I-87 in Orange County. As of December 2006, approximately 298 kilometers of NYS Route 17 west from Chemung County and a 16 kilometer segment within Broome County have been completed and designated as Interstate 86, for a total length of 314 kilometers. The remainder of Route 17 has been posted as future Interstate 86, including the area within the project limits. Several other projects, either in design or programmed, are ongoing along NYS Route 17. Among those there are two improvement projects that are immediately adjacent to this project:
● PIN 9066.96 NYS Route 17 improvements to Interchanges 102, 103, 104,107 & 108. ● PIN 9067.10 NYS Route 17 improvements to Interchanges 109,110,111,112, 114 & 115.
The need for the bridge replacement project was identified by the Regional Structures Engineer upon review of the biennial inspection reports and numerous other structural flags issued for the structure. The Regional Traffic and Safety Group had also identified several safety related problems and provided recommendations for potential improvements. The Initial Project Proposal was completed by the Regional Structures Engineer and approved by the Regional Capital Program Committee. It was added to the capital construction program in September of 2003. Based on capital program changes and internal staff availability, project scoping was delayed until the summer of 2005.
2-1 June 2009 FINAL DESIGN REPORT PIN 9067.17
2.2. Transportation Plans and Land Use
2.2.1. Local Plans for the Project Area
2.2.1.1. Local Master Plan - The local master plan developed by the Town of Thompson has been reviewed by Region 9 Planning and will not be affected by this project.
2.2.1.2. Local Private Development Plans - The Stockbridge-Munsee Community, Band of Mohican Indians of Wisconsin (the Tribe) has submitted an Environmental Assessment (EA) based on a proposed Casino complex on a parcel of land adjacent to the project. The site description in the EA states:
“The site is generally situated north of Exit 107 on State Route 17. The site occurs on both the east and west sides of County Highway 161 (Heiden Road). The Neversink River forms the eastern property boundary of Gildick. The main features of Gildick are the mining operation and the auto salvage yard…..”
The proposed complex consists of several phases. Phase I includes the main casino complex of over 54,255 m² and nearly 8,500 parking spaces. Phase II includes a 750 room hotel and 1,020 space parking structure.
The St. Regis Mohawk Tribe has prepared a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) to assess the environmental consequences for the development of the “Mohawk Mountain Casino Resort” located along Anawana Lake Road in the Town of Thompson, Sullivan County. The proposed alternatives would utilize different sites within the area currently known as the Kutsher’s property.
2.2.2. Transportation Corridor
2.2.2.1. Importance of the Project Route Segment - The project corridor is to be designated as a part of the Eisenhower Interstate System, acting as a southern state link between Interstates 390, 81 and 88 to the West and to Interstates 84 and 87 to the East.
2.2.2.2. Alternate Routes – There are no alternative routes that would be suitable as a detour for construction on Route 17. Local roads are insufficient to handle the required traffic volumes.
2.2.2.3. Corridor Deficiencies and Needs - The need for additional capacity along the NYS Route 17/ Interstate 86 corridor is heavily dependent on the potential casino complexes in the area. Reports containing further information on potential traffic impacts related to casino development are available from the Regional Planning and Program Management Group.
2.2.2.4. Transportation Plans - NYS Route 17 was selected to be designated for inclusion in the Interstate Highway System as Interstate 86 under the Transportation Equity Act (TEA-21) of 1998. There are no plans for major changes or improvements to NYS Route 17 over and above what is currently being proposed by the current interstate designation projects. There has been some discussion in the past concerning a widening project for NYS Route 17 to ease weekend congestion in Sullivan and Orange counties. This congestion is intermittent and mostly occurs on the weekends during commutes to and from New York City. Tentative coordination efforts between Regions 8 and 9 have begun but there are currently no plans for a future roadway widening project within the project area.
2.2.2.5. Abutting Highway Segments and Future Plans for Abutting Highway Segments - The abutting segments of NYS Route 17 in the vicinity to BIN 1013799 were originally built under a series of Federal Aid projects, FARC 57-42 and FARC 55-42. NYS Route 17 has two travel lanes in each direction that vary from 3.6 to 3.9 m wide. Shoulders are 1.2 m wide on the left and generally 2.4 m to 3.0 m on the right.
2-2 June 2009 FINAL DESIGN REPORT PIN 9067.17
There are several projects that are either under construction or planned for the surrounding area. PIN 9066.96 includes the reconstruction of Interchanges 102, 103, 104, 107, and 108. Interchanges 107 and 108 are located within the limits of this project and will be directly affected by its construction. PIN 9067.10 is a similar project that includes Interchanges 109, 110, 111, 112, 114 and 115. Both PIN 9066.96 and PIN 9067.10 have a proposed letting date in the summer of 2010.
2.3. Transportation Conditions, Deficiencies and Engineering Considerations
2.3.1. Operations (Traffic and Safety) & Maintenance
2.3.1.1. Functional Classification and National Highway System (NHS) –
Exhibit - 2.3.1.1. Classification Data Route(s) NYS Route 17 Functional Classification Principal Arterial Other
National Highway System (NHS) Yes
Designated Truck Access Route Yes Qualifying Highway Yes Within 1.6 km of a Qualifying Highway Yes
Within the 4.9 m vertical clearance network Yes
2.3.1.2. Control of Access – Access to NYS Route 17 is fully controlled within the project limits.
2.3.1.3. Traffic Control Devices – There are no traffic signals within the project limits. The signs within the project area range from satisfactory to good condition. The pavement markings are in fair condition with some areas showing signs of wear. Milled-in audible roadway delineators in the bituminous concrete shoulders on both sides of the highway are present within the limits of this project. There are no audible roadway delineators in the median side shoulders where concrete median barrier exists.
2.3.1.4. Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) – NYS Route 17 in Sullivan County possesses a combination of weather and geometry issues that directly contribute to a high frequency of accidents and other traffic related incidences. The Department of Transportation had initiated PIN 9803.81 (New York State Route 17 Weather and Road Condition Monitoring and Information System) with Castle Rock Consultants (CRC) in March 2002. CRC submitted a Draft Design Report (DDR) in May 2003 identifying a section of the NYS Route 17 corridor, between the Village of Monticello and the Orange County line, as having several hazardous “hot spots” concentrated in two areas: the Bridgeville valley between Interchange 106 and 109; and the Wurtsboro valley between Interchange 111 and 114. The area near BIN 1013799 and between Interchanges 107 and 108 was identified as an icy pavement zone based on the number of icing related accidents. The recommendations for the area included the installation of a Road Weather Information System (RWIS) on the east approach to the structure with a Mini-Station located on the east approach of Interchange 108. In addition to the RWIS stations, the report also recommended the installation of a Dynamic Message Sign (DMS) approximately 1.6 km east prior to Interchange 107 to provide useful real-time information to drivers along the corridor. However, there are currently no ITS systems in operation within the project limits.
2-3 June 2009 FINAL DESIGN REPORT PIN 9067.17
2.3.1.5. Speeds and Delay –
Exhibit - 2.3.1.5. Speed Data Route 17 Existing Speed Limit 105km/h (65 mph) Actual Operating Speed and Method Used Not applicable* Travel Speed and Delay Runs for Existing Conditions Not required since existing LOS is C or better.
Travel Time and Delay Runs Estimates Not required since existing LOS is C or better. * The design speed for Route 17, based on the maximum functional class speed for rural freeways (level and rolling), is 110 km/h. A speed study is not required for Freeway or Interstate projects utilizing a design speed of 110 km/h or higher.
2.3.1.6. Traffic Volumes – Traffic in Sullivan County is seasonal with the highest volumes occurring in the summer months. The horse racing track located at Monticello is outside the limits of this project but still has a major influence on traffic volumes within the project limits. There is also heavy directional traffic occurring on the weekends on this section of NYS Route 17. This is caused by motorists traveling to and from the New York Metropolitan area to seasonal homes located in and around the local lakes adjacent to NYS Route 17. The heavy movement is westbound on Fridays and east bound on Sunday evenings. Local school buses, public transportation and emergency services vehicles also make extensive use of NYS Route 17.
Existing hourly traffic reports and analysis for the following tables are available for review in the Regional Planning and Program Management Office. Count Station # 960050 was used to provide the present and projected "No Action" traffic volumes for NYS Route 17 listed in Exhibit 2.3.1.6.
Exhibit - 2.3.1.6. NYS Route 17 Existing and Future Forecast Traffic Volumes between Int. 107 and 108
East Bound West Bound Year AADT DDHV AADT DDHV Existing (2006) 13,600 955 14,500 1,015 ETC (2011) 14,800 1,035 15,800 1,105 ETC+20 (2031) 19,300 1,350 20,600 1,445 ETC+30 (2041) 21,600 1,515 23,100 1,620 Note: ETC is the Estimated Time of Completion
If proposed casinos are approved by the state legislature, the long range traffic projections will need to be recalculated.
2.3.1.7. Level of Service and Mobility –
2.3.1.7. (1) Existing level of service and capacity analysis – The Level of Service (LOS) measures the operating characteristics of a road with a range of values from “A” through “F”. LOS “A” corresponds to unconstrained, free-flowing traffic conditions and LOS “F” indicates a condition of significant congestion and delay.
2-4 June 2009 FINAL DESIGN REPORT PIN 9067.17
2.3.1.7. (1) Existing and future no-action level of service:
Exhibit - 2.3.1.7. (1) Highway Design Year Level of Service NYS Route 17, From Interchange 107 to Interchange 108 YEAR Eastbound Westbound Existing (2006) A A ETC (2011) A A ETC+20 (2031) B B ETC+30 (2041) B B
2.3.1.8. Safety Considerations, Accident History and Analysis – The 1.29 km portion of NYS Route 17 from RM 17 9609 1318 to 1325 was the scene of twenty accidents in the three year period from September 1, 1998 to August 31, 2001. Three of the total accidents resulted in injuries; the rest resulted in property damage only. This severity distribution is normal.
The overall accident rate for the study area is 0.73 accidents per million vehicle kilometers (MVKm). The comparable statewide average accident rate is 0.66.
The study area does not appear on the 2002 High Accident Location (HAL) list nor does it appear on the preceding two Priority Investigation Location (PIL) lists. The area has appeared as PIL in the past. Studies done over ten years ago resulted in recommendations for icy pavement related warning signs, which have since been installed. The area is no longer listed on PIL list, although there is still an icy pavement related accident pattern.
The accidents are distributed into categories describing the attributing factors: Human (36%), Vehicle (5%), Environmental (59%).Twelve accidents within the study area involve a single vehicle losing control during slippery pavement conditions. The roadway is composed of a steep down grade (-7%) in the eastbound direction from 1318 to 1321, and then a steep upgrade (5%) from 1322 to 1325 forming a sag vertical curve on the bridge. The accidents are uniformly split between eastbound and westbound for both of these segments. Only three of the twelve accident reports mention or refer to a horizontal curve in the roadway - there are two within this sag vertical curve area. Ten of the accidents resulted in median barrier and/or guide rail strikes, one accident resulted in an embankment strike, and the last accident involved a vehicle which was able to stop in the roadway without hitting barrier but was then struck by four approaching vehicles which were unable to stop. None of the vehicles hitting rail or barrier overturned (Refer to Section 2.3.3.8 for a discussion on guide rails and median barriers). The left shoulder adjacent to the concrete median barrier is approximately 0.3m wide. Shoulders on the bridge are also nonstandard. Both directions of the roadway are posted adequately with Icy Pavement Zone signing. There are trees and rock slopes along the southern side of the roadway which could contribute to icing in the winter, particularly in the eastbound direction.
Another accident involving a concrete median strike contains a description from the operator stating he accidentally shifted too close to the barrier and struck it before being able to correct. One accident involved an operator who fell asleep and hit barrier before he could regain control. The roadway has milled-in audible roadway delineators installed where the shoulder is wide enough to accommodate them.
The remaining accidents are two deer hits, two debris related accidents, and two lane change accidents of uncertain origin, one of which resulted in a concrete median hit.
A more recent analysis was performed for the project area from March 1, 2004 through February 28, 2007. These studies limits were increased 0.5 km on both sides of the project limits following the
2-5 June 2009 FINAL DESIGN REPORT PIN 9067.17
guidelines presented in Chapter 5 of the Highway Design Manual. This increased the study area to 2.89 km from RM 17 9609 1313 to 1331, approximately 1.6 kilometer longer than the original analysis.
The overall accident rate for this study is 0.71 accidents per million vehicle kilometers (Acc/MVKm). The comparable statewide average accident rate for the current study year is 0.52 Acc/MVKm.
The accidents were distributed into these categories: Human (54%), Vehicle (15%) and Environmental (31%). Forty five accidents were reported during the three year period with 60% eastbound and 40% on the westbound roadway. Of the forty five accidents, sixteen (36%) were attributed to slippery pavement conditions. Sixteen (36%) involved injuries and twenty nine (65%) were property damages. Twenty one (47%) of these accidents were on the steep vertical grade portions of the road while seven (16%) were in the horizontal curve portions of the road.
Human factors contributed in the accident rates. There were four (9%) rear end accidents, seven (16%) lane change/overtaking accidents, six (13%) animal strikes and fifteen (65%) fixed objects accidents. Fourteen among them were due to striking against guide rail and one was due to striking against debris. Other contributing human factors were alcohol/drug use (4%), falling asleep while driving (4%) and driver inattention (2%).
Though the study area did not appear on the 2002 High Accident Location list (HAL) in the previous study, it does appear on the 2005 and 2006 HAL list. All entries listed are categorized as Safety Deficient Locations (SDL).
Exhibit 2.3.1.8. - a High Accident Locations (HAL) High Accident Location Study Year Priority Investigation Location (PIL) Safety Deficient Location (SDL) 2005 N/A RM 1312 – 1318 2005 N/A RM 1320 – 1328 2005 N/A RM 1329 – 1331 2006 N/A RM 1312 – 1318 2006 N/A RM 1319 – 1327 2006 N/A RM 1329 – 1348
The types of accidents that occurred and their contributing factors are consistent with the previous study and the recommendations that were made are still valid. A copy of the accident analysis memo dated April 8, 2004 is in Appendix “C”.
2.3.1.9. Existing Police, Fire Protection and Ambulance Access – Existing NYS Route 17 within the project limits is accessible and frequently used by emergency vehicles.
2.3.1.10. Parking Regulations and Parking Related Conditions - No parking is permitted on NYS Route 17 by Special Order. Emergency stopping is permitted. Parking is allowed at a small parking area maintained by NYS Department of Environmental Conservation below the structure, span #3, with access from Edwards Island Road.
2.3.1.11. Lighting – There is no street lighting within the highway limits.
2-6 June 2009 FINAL DESIGN REPORT PIN 9067.17
2.3.1.12. Ownership and Maintenance Jurisdiction – NYS Route 17 and BIN 1013799 are owned and maintained by the New York State Department of Transportation in accordance with Sections 12 & 46 of the New York State Highway Law. County and town roads within the project limits are individually owned and maintained by the municipalities. A summary of current Ownership and Maintenance Jurisdiction information is provided in Exhibit 2.3.1.12.
Exhibit - 2.3.1.12. Existing Maintenance Jurisdiction Feature(s) Part Centerline Lane Highway being Agency Authority No. (km) (km) Maintained Pavement, Shoulders, Guiderails, Bridges, Section 12 and 46, 1. NYS Route 17 1.4 7.0 New York State Drainage, Ditches, Highway Law Signs, Pavement Markings, Snow and Ice Control Pavement, Edwards Island Drainage, Snow Town of Section 10(25) 2. 0.1 0.2 Road and Ice Control, Thompson Highway Law Landscaping
2.3.2. Multimodal
2.3.2.1. Pedestrians – NYSDOT Official Order 75-5-9-2, dated December 28, 1981, "Prohibits the use of the controlled access sections of the NYS Route 17 Expressway by pedestrians, bicycles and horses between the Orange / Sullivan County line and the Broome / Tioga County line in the Counties of Broome, Delaware and Sullivan". There are no State bike routes on or adjacent to NYS Route 17 within the project area. No further routes have been identified. A copy of the Pedestrian Generator Checklist has been completed and is available in Appendix “C”.
2.3.2.2. Bicyclists – Bicyclists are prohibited on controlled access portions of NYS Route17 in Region 9.
2.3.2.3. Transit - There are no transit providers operating within the project limits.
2.3.2.4. Airports, Railroad Stations, and Ports - There are no airports, railroad stations or port entrances within or adjacent to project limits.
2.3.2.5. Access to Recreation Areas (Parks, Trails, Waterways, and State Lands) - There is a recreational parking area on Edwards Island Road underneath the north east side of the existing bridge.
2-7 June 2009 FINAL DESIGN REPORT PIN 9067.17
2.3.3. Infrastructure 2.3.3.1. Existing Highway Section - The following diagrams of the typical existing highway section represents NYS Route 17 mainline, mainline with auxiliary lanes and typical existing ramp sections. All dimensions are in meters.
Exhibit 2.3.3.1. – A –Typical Sections for Existing Highway
SPEED ∆ SPEED ∆ LANE LANE
2-8 June 2009 FINAL DESIGN REPORT PIN 9067.17
2.3.3.1. (1) ROW Widths: Right of way widths vary along the entire NYS Route 17 corridor. Within the project limits, the approximate widths vary from 40m to 100m.
2.3.3.1. (2) Lane Characteristics: Within the project limits, NYS Route 17 consists of two travel lanes in each direction with lane widths of 4.0m (inside lane) and 3.6m (outside lane). The eastbound and westbound mainline shoulder widths are 1.2m on the left and 3.0m on the right. All the shoulders are stabilized with asphalt. The original pavement consisted of 225mm reinforced Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) that has been overlaid with asphalt concrete. In 1998, under State Contract D255353, the asphalt overlay was milled and replaced with approximately 80mm of bituminous asphalt concrete. The eastern approach highway in the westbound direction develops a truck climbing lane/ auxiliary median lane on the median side up a 7.0% vertical grade. The western approach highway in the eastbound direction develops a truck climbing lane/ auxiliary median lane up a long 5.0% vertical grade. This lane also develops on the median side.
2.3.3.1. (3) Curbing: There is granite curb along both sides of BIN1013799. There is no other curbing along this section of NYS Route 17.
2.3.3.1. (4) Type and Width of Median: The median is paved with asphalt concrete and is approximately 9.8m wide on the eastern approach and 9.1m wide on western approach. Drainage structures collect median runoff.
2.3.3.1. (5) Grades and Curves: The structure is located near the bottom of a sag vertical curve. The approach grade is -7.0% and the structure is located on a departure grade of +1.0% with a quick transition to another vertical curve with a departure grade of +5.0%. The structure is located on a horizontal tangent of approximately 335m between two horizontal curves.
2.3.3.1. (6) Intersection Geometry and Conditions: There are no intersections within the project limits. Interchange 107 is located approximately 750m to the west of the structure and Interchange 108 is located approximately 600m to the east of structure.
2.3.3.1. (7) Snow Storage: Snow storage is provided along the edge of the shoulders.
2.3.3.1. (8) Driveways: There are no driveways within the project limit.
2.3.3.1. (9) Clear Zone: The minimum clear zone varies throughout the project limits. It is 0.3m to 3.0m where barrier is present and a minimum of 3.6m where there is no barrier.
2-9 June 2009 FINAL DESIGN REPORT PIN 9067.17
2.3.3.2. Geometric Design Elements Not Meeting 2R/3R or Bridge Rehabilitation Standards –
2.3.3.2. (1) Critical Design Elements –
Exhibit 2.3.3.2. (1) Summary of Mainline Nonstandard Features Type of Feature Existing Value Standard Value Mainline Grades 5.0% - 7.0% 4.0% (max. for rolling) Right Shoulder Width on bridge 1.8m 3.0m
Left Shoulder Width on bridge 0.3m 1.2m Stopping Sight distance 106m 220m
Vertical Clearance 4.44m 4.9m BIN 1013780 (Interchange 107) Median Width 1.9m min. 11.0m min./15-30m desirable
2.3.3.2. (2) Other Controlling Parameters –
- At Interchange 107 the eastbound on acceleration lane from County Route 161 has a nonstandard length of 280m. The standard length is 460m.
- At Interchange 108 the eastbound on acceleration lane from County Route 173 has a nonstandard length of 201m. The standard length is 308m.
2.3.3.3. Pavement and Shoulder - The original pavement consisted of 225mm reinforced Portland Cement Concrete (PCC). Several projects have been completed since the original construction. Contract D250774, completed in 1984, rehabilitated the bridge deck and placed approximately 100mm of asphalt overlay and stabilized the shoulders in the area. In 1998, under State Contract D255353, that asphalt overlay was milled and replaced with approximately 80mm of bituminous asphalt concrete.
In the 2006 Highway Sufficiency Ratings, NYS Route 17 between interchanges 107 and 108 was rated a 7. This rating has not changed in the last five years and indicates that the pavement is in good condition, which is generally characterized as having infrequent to occasional distress with slight severity.
2.3.3.4. Drainage Systems – The drainage system along NYS Route 17 is comprised of a closed drainage network which runs along the median and connects to numerous cross culverts with drop inlets. In addition to the closed system, open drainage ditches with asphalt concrete and concrete gutters exist throughout the project limits. Open earthen ditches range in a variety of widths, while the asphalt concrete and concrete gutters are 1.2m wide. The concrete gutter along the median has been paved over with asphalt concrete. Several gutters adjacent to the pavement edges remain concrete. BIN 1013799 has granite curbs that control water along the pavement and direct it toward scuppers located in the bridge deck. No other structures are present. The median and side gutters appear to be in good shape.
2.3.3.5. Geotechnical – There are no special geotechnical concerns with the soils or rock slopes within the project area.
2-10 June 2009 FINAL DESIGN REPORT PIN 9067.17
2.3.3.6. Structure –
2.3.3.6. (1) Description –
Exhibit - 2.3.3.6. (1) Existing Structure Feature BIN 1013799 Reference Marker 17-9609 1322 SH Number 5457 Feature Carried NYS Route 17 Feature Crossed Edwards Island Road, Neversink River Owner/Maintenance NYSDOT Main Span Type Approach – plate girder, floor beam system Main Spans – deck truss Number of Span(s) 4 Span Length(s) Approach 21.34m, Main 42.67m Bridge Length 130.15m Width (Out - Out) 20.42m Width (Curb - Curb) 19.51m Number of Travel Lanes 4 Lane Width(s) 3.6m Shoulder Width 0.3m left , 1.8m right Median Width 0.6m, concrete barrier Sidewalks / safety walks None Utilities Carried None Year Built 1953, FARC 50-52 Yr. of Last Major Rehab. 1985, D250794 Last Inspection 8/2007 Federal Sufficiency 81.6 State Condition Rating 3.906 State Ranking 458 Regional Ranking 14 Priority Ranking 37.07 General Recommendation 4 Posted Load None
2.3.3.6. (2) Clearances (Horizontal/Vertical) – The minimum vertical clearance below BIN 1013799 is 7.19m to Edwards Island Road. The minimum horizontal clearance is 1.8m on the right side of Edwards Island Road.
2.3.3.6. (3) History & Deficiencies – The structure was originally constructed in 1953 and is eligible for the Historic Register because it demonstrates individuality or variation of features within a particular bridge type. The main spans of the structure consist of Warren Deck Trusses. Based on the fatigue prone details of the superstructure, a 100% hands-on inspection is necessary for all the welds on the superstructure. Over the years, a significant portion of the structural flags raised for the bridge have been due to cracked welds that have the potential to migrate and crack the base metal in the primary structural members. Because of this hazard, the structure has been rated a 1 (one) under Structural Vulnerability by the Bridge Safety Assurance Unit.
2-11 June 2009 FINAL DESIGN REPORT PIN 9067.17
In addition to the structural deterioration present on the bridge superstructure, the abutment and piers are in poor condition with significant cracking present in the cap beams and pier caps. Spalling concrete present on piers has created a hazard to the people fishing below the structure, resulting in the issuing of yellow structural flags. The bridge joints, bearings, railing, curbs, and paint are all in fair to poor condition based on the biennial inspection report. Further details concerning deficiencies for BIN 1013799 are outlined in the Bridge Inspection Reports available in the NYSDOT Region 9 office.
2.3.3.6. (4) Inspection –
Federal Sufficiency Rating – 81.6 State Condition Rating – 3.906
General recommendations from the Biennial Bridge Inspection Report and safety flags issued can be found in Appendix “E”.
2.3.3.6. (5) Restrictions – There are no restrictions on any of the structures within the project limits.
2.3.3.6. (6) Future Conditions – No restrictions are anticipated in the near future.
2.3.3.6. (7) Waterway – A US Coast Guard Section 9 Permit is not required for this project because it is not in or over a USCG navigable water.
2.3.3.7. Hydraulics of Bridges and Culverts – The Neversink River passes below spans 2 and 3 of the bridge and there are no known hydraulic problems at the structure.
2.3.3.8. Guide Railing, Median Barriers and Impact Attenuators –
2.3.3.8. (1) Guide Railing - The highway guide railing throughout the project limit is comprised primarily of cable mounted on weak posts. The cable rail transitions to bridge rail at the bridge approaches. Several sections of cable railing appear to have less than the required tension. The railings have signs of damage caused by impacts in many areas. The bridge rail is comprised of two-rail bridge rail and is in fair condition. The existing bridge rail is NCHRP 230 compliant, but does not meet NCHRP 350.
2.3.3.8. (2) Median Barrier - 150mm x 200mm galvanized box beam median barrier exists throughout the project limits. Concrete median barrier starts at approximately RM 17 9609-1320 and extends to approximately RM 17 9609 1326 before transitioning back to box beam median barrier. The barrier has been impacted multiple times and the box beam median rail is in poor condition.
2.3.3.8. (3) Impact Attenuators - There are no impact attenuator devices located within the project limits.
Exhibit - 2.3.3.8. (3) Existing Guide Railing and Median Barriers Location Type Side Length Condition (Sta to Sta) Cable Guide Railing 1+000 TO 1+207 EB 207 Fair Cable Guide Railing 1+720 TO 2+225 EB 505 Fair Box Beam Guide Railing 1+455 TO 1+663 EB 208 Fair Box Beam Guide Railing 2+225 TO 2+275 EB 50 Fair Two Rail Bridge Rail 2+275 TO 2+400 EB 125 Good* Box Beam Guide Railing 2+400 TO 2+450 EB 50 Fair Cable Guide Railing 1+000 TO 1+172 WB 172 Fair Box Beam Guide Railing 1+408 TO 1+700 WB 292 Fair Cable Guide Railing 1+780 TO 1+850 WB 70 Fair Cable Guide Railing 2+000 TO 2+225 WB 225 Fair Box Beam Guide Railing 2+225 TO 2+275 WB 50 Fair
2-12 June 2009 FINAL DESIGN REPORT PIN 9067.17
Exhibit - 2.3.3.8. (3) Existing Guide Railing and Median Barriers Location Type Side Length Condition (Sta to Sta) Two Rail Bridge Rail 2+275 TO 2+400 WB 125 Good* Box Beam Guide Railing 2+400 TO 2+450 WB 50 Fair Cable Guide Railing 2+450 TO 2+925 WB 475 Fair Box Beam Guide Railing 1+000 TO 1+177 MED 177 Fair Box Beam Guide Railing 1+194 TO 1+545 MED 351 Fair Box Beam Guide Railing 1+515 TO 1+850 MED 335 Fair Box Beam Median Barrier 1+850 TO 1+950 MED 100 Fair Box Beam Median Barrier 1+950 TO 1+970 MED 20 Poor Box Beam Median Barrier 1+970 TO 2+050 MED 80 Fair Box Beam Median Barrier 2+600 TO 3+037 MED 437 Fair Concrete Median Barrier 2+050 TO 2+600 MED 550 Fair * Two Rail Bridge Rail does not meet NCHRP 350 requirements.
2.3.3.9. Utilities – A preliminary field review of the project area revealed the following utilities: Aerial electric, telephone, and possible cable. Aerial electric lines exist on the north side of eastern approach and there is a transverse utility crossing on the western approach that appears to carry aerial electric, phone, and cable lines. There were no visible utilities carried on the structure.
There are aerial utility lines along Edwards Island Road that appear to be phone and cable.
Exhibit - 2.3.3.9. Existing Utilities on Mainline Rt 17 Owner Type Location/Side Length Condition (m) NYSEG OH Power Line Verizon OH Telephone 2+000 Crossing N/A Fair Time Warner OH Cable WB 2+368 To Verizon OH Telephone 370 Fair WB 2+738 LT NYSEG OH Power Line Verizon OH Telephone 2+850 Crossing N/A Fair Time Warner OH Cable Existing Utilities along Edwards Island Road Time Warner OH Cable Along Edwards N/A Fair Verizon OH Telephone Island Road
2.3.3.10. Railroad Facilities – There are no active railroads within or adjacent to this project.
2.3.4. Landscape and Environmental Enhancement Opportunities – This section focuses on the critical existing areas to identify potential enhancement opportunities related to the project and to help avoid and minimize impacts. Chapter 4 focuses on the impacts, enhancements, and mitigation.
2.3.4.1. Landscape
Although located adjacent to the Monticello small urban planning area, land use within the project limits is rural with sparse development due to the topography associated with the valley. On a broader scale, most of the development is of a suburban nature located along the local roads. Land use includes rural residential, minor commercial properties, woodlots, agricultural and state lands.
2-13 June 2009 FINAL DESIGN REPORT PIN 9067.17
2.3.4.1. (1) Terrain – The terrain throughout the project is rolling.
2.3.4.1. (2) Unusual Weather Conditions – Winter weather conditions have been linked to a high frequency of traffic incidents on NYS Route 17 in Sullivan County. The project area between Interchanges 107 and 108 has been identified as an icy pavement zone based on the number of icing related accidents. Motorists may encounter weather related hazards including fog, high winds, ice, drifting snow and roadway temperature variations throughout the project area.
2.3.4.1. (3) Visual Resource Inventory - The Primary land use is a mix of agricultural, residential and commercial throughout the project limit. Within this section NYS Rte 17 corridor, the scenery is generally rural in nature with rolling mountainous views that are covered with dense vegetation.
2.3.4.2. Opportunities for Environmental Improvements – The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation maintains a parking lot for fishing access to the Neversink River on Edwards Island Road which is crossed below Span#3 of the structure. Contact was made with NYSDEC and the opportunity exists to further develop/improve the facility during this project. The other opportunities for environmental enhancements are limited within the project limits.
2.3.5. Miscellaneous – None.
2-14