HomeMy WebLinkAboutRt 96 - Trumansburg Rd Pedestrian Study Final Report 2020Route 96 Pedestrian Study Report
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road
Pedestrian Corridor Study Project
PIN: 3756.21
Town of Ithaca
Prepared for
Town of Ithaca
215 North Tioga Street
Ithaca, NY 14850
Revision 1
April 2020
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road
Pedestrian Corridor Study Project
PIN: 3756.21
Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County
April 2020
Prepared for:
Town of Ithaca
215 North Tioga Street
Ithaca, NY 14850
Prepared by:
Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
443 Electronics Parkway
Liverpool, New York 13088
NYS Route 96 Pedestrian Study Report
2071.001.001/04.2020 -i -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................. 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 3
1.1.Study Area ................................................................................................................................. 4
1.2.Study Purpose ........................................................................................................................... 5
2.0 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ............................................................................................................... 7
2.1.Overview ................................................................................................................................... 7
2.2.Survey Highlights ...................................................................................................................... 7
2.3.Needs and Opportunities ....................................................................................................... 10
3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS .............................................................................................................. 11
3.1.Existing Land Usage ................................................................................................................ 11
3.2.Environmental Assessment .................................................................................................... 13
3.3.Future Plans in Project Area................................................................................................... 15
4.0 TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS..................................................................................................... 16
4.1.Transportation Network ......................................................................................................... 16
4.2.Traffic Data and Analysis ........................................................................................................ 19
4.3.Accident Data and Analysis .................................................................................................... 26
4.4.Pedestrian Data and Analysis ................................................................................................. 30
5.0 PRELIMINARY DESIGN ............................................................................................................... 36
5.1.Design Criteria ........................................................................................................................ 36
5.2.Design Alternatives ................................................................................................................. 39
6.0 DETAILED EVALUATION ............................................................................................................. 43
6.1.Alternative 2 – Sidewalk Connection East Side ..................................................................... 43
6.2.Alternative 3 – Sidewalk Connection West & Mid-Block Crossing ....................................... 44
6.3.Cost Summary ......................................................................................................................... 45
6.4.Additional Design Concepts ................................................................................................... 45
7.0 POTENTIAL PERMITS and COORDINATION................................................................................. 50
8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................................................ 51
NYS Route 96 Pedestrian Study Report
2071.001.001/04.2020 -ii -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
Tables
Table 2-1: Sequence of Project Meetings ................................................................................................ 7
Table 4-1: Roadway Characteristics ....................................................................................................... 18
Table 4-2: Level of Service (LOS) Criteria for Intersections ..................................................................... 20
Table 4-3: Existing Traffic Volumes - 2018 Existing Conditions ............................................................... 21
Table 4-4: Trip Generation Summary - Existing...................................................................................... 23
Table 4-5: ETC+20 (2039) Forecasted Traffic Volumes ........................................................................... 25
Table 4-6: Accident Severity.................................................................................................................. 27
Table 4-7: Accident Rate Comparison - Accident Rates per Million Entering Vehicles (MEV) / Accident
Rates per Million Vehicle Miles (MVM) .................................................................................................. 27
Table 4-8: Accident Summary ............................................................................................................... 29
Table 4-9: Level of Service (LOS) Criteria for Signalized Pedestrian Facilities .......................................... 31
Table 4-10: Existing Condition Pedestrian Level of Services (LOS) Gap Analysis ..................................... 32
Table 5-1: Design Standards .................................................................................................................. 36
Table 5-2: Critical Design Elements for Trumansburg Road ................................................................... 37
Table 5-3: Sidewalk Design Criteria ....................................................................................................... 38
Table 6-1: Probably Cost Summary ....................................................................................................... 45
Exhibits
Exhibit 1-1: Study Area ............................................................................................................................ 4
Exhibit 3-1: Project Area Map ................................................................................................................ 12
Exhibit 3-2: Existing Notable Locations .................................................................................................. 12
Exhibit 4-1: Intersection 1 Weekday Data .............................................................................................. 33
Exhibit 4-2: Intersection 2 Weekday Data .............................................................................................. 34
Exhibit 4-3: Intersection 3 Weekday Data .............................................................................................. 34
Appendices
Appendix A – Figures
Appendix B – Concept Plans
Appendix C – Public Workshop Information Materials
Appendix D – Survey Response Summary and Public Comment Sheets
Appendix E – Existing Conditions
Appendix F – Traffic Data and Figures
Appendix G – Pedestrian Generator Checklist
2071.001.001/04.2020 -1 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The NYS Route 96 / Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study project (PIN: 3756.21) is a feasibility
analysis of pedestrian infrastructure needs within the NYS Route 96 / Trumansburg Road corridor. This
project has been developed in accordance with the procedures for Locally Administered Federal Aid
Projects (LAFAP).
The corridor study limits begin at the Town/City of Ithaca municipal boundary to the south, and extends
approximately 1.3 miles north to Hayts Road. The study identifies potential sidewalk routes, including
connections to the City of Ithaca sidewalk system and the NYS Parks-owned Black Diamond Trail.
Additionally, the analysis includes a review of the transportation / roadway facilities within the project
area. Currently, the project corridor has no sidewalks, leaving pedestrians to use the shoulder of
Trumansburg Road to walk between the City of Ithaca and various facilities along the road. The only
sidewalks within the corridor are from the Outlook Apartments and Cayuga Medical Center, connecting
Harris B Dates Dr. and W Hill Dr. to Trumansburg Road, however these do not continue north or south
along Trumansburg Rd. This study is being performed in response to public input and the Town of
Ithaca’s desire to significantly improve pedestrian safety and improve the connectivity for key facilities
along the corridor.
The feasibility assessment includes a comprehensive review of public participation results, existing site
conditions, right-of-way ownership, existing land usage, potential future development, pedestrian usage
data and a preliminary environmental analysis. To further inform the study, the assessment included a
review of the transportation network, as well as traffic and accident data.
An integral component of the study was public participation, including community surveys and two
public workshops. The public participation results further reinforced the public demand for improved
pedestrian facilities, and a strong desire for a connection to the Black Diamond Trail and a safe
pedestrian connection to the City of Ithaca. Additionally, public input drew attention to bicyclist usage
and public transit usage along the corridor, which have been considered in developing the proposed
improvements.
The existing conditions assessment presents some key considerations for the sidewalk routes and other
improvements, which have been reflected within the design alternatives to meet the goals of the
project. The existing right-of-way mapping indicates that the project will likely require easements and/or
acquisitions to provide the safest continual route for the proposed east sidewalk route.
Future developments, such as residential subdivisions and apartments along the project corridor serve
to further reinforce the need for sidewalk routes. The proposed sidewalk alternatives consider these
future developments.
2071.001.001/04.2020 -2 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
The pedestrian usage data showed typical pedestrian routes and usage patterns currently within the
study area. The usage identified pedestrian volumes and patterns with pedestrians and bicyclists using
the shoulder and crossing Trumansburg road at certain locations. The alternatives look to encourage
safer pedestrian routes including sidewalks between usage areas and connections to existing crosswalks
with a possible additional mid-block crossing. The connection to the Black Diamond Trail looks to
minimize bicyclist volume along the corridor where narrow shoulders, curves and vehicle speed
contribute to unsafe conditions.
The preliminary environmental assessment found the sidewalk routes and other improvements would
have limited to no environmental impacts. The primary permanent impact would be loss of mature trees
and additional impervious surface increasing stormwater runoff. Construction timing may be impacted
due to environmental restrictions on summer tree removal, resulting from potential for endangered
species habitat.
The transportation network was assessed to confirm roadway standards and classification. Trumansburg
Road is a New York State highway (NYS Route 96), with 6’ wide shoulders and 12’ wide travel lanes,
which meets NYSDOT standards. NYS Route 96 is functionally classified as an Urban Minor Arterial (Non-
NHS) highway. A summary of the highway standards is presented; the proposed design concept does
not include any non-standard features, such as reduced travel lane or shoulder widths.
The traffic data analysis determined that Trumansburg road has an acceptable Level of Service (LOS)
rating, and future developments are not expected to significantly degrade the quality. The accident
analysis however, determined that this corridor has higher than normal accident rates at each
intersection. These findings indicate that there may be a need for changes to the roadway intersections.
The design of geometric improvements to intersections is beyond the scope of this pedestrian study,
however recommendations are provided for location and consideration of geometric improvements
where warranted, i.e. Harris B Dates Dr. The study also recommends that the Town request NYSDOT
perform a Speed Limit Study within the project corridor.
Design alternatives were developed as part of the study, as presented on Figures 1 to 4 of Appendix A.
A detailed evaluation of design alternatives was completed; concept plans, P-1 to P-3, are presented in
Appendix B. The overall corridor study recommendation is to pursue the proposed build alternatives,
with sidewalks on the full length of the east side of NYS Route 96 / Trumansburg Rd. as the top priority,
followed by sidewalks on the west side between Hayts Dr. and Bundy Rd. Additional options are
presented that would further benefit the accessibility of the corridor, such as connections to Black
Diamond Trail, improved signage and public transit improvements.
2071.001.001/04.2020 -3 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This project involves a feasibility analysis of pedestrian needs within the NYS Route 96 / Trumansburg
Road corridor. The project involves identifying potential sidewalk routes, including potential connections
with the City of Ithaca sidewalk system and/or the NYS Parks-owned Black Diamond Trail, along with
other necessary pedestrian improvements such as upgrades to existing traffic controls and associated
crosswalks, or potential locations for new crosswalks. The assessment examines alternative sidewalk
routes and other pedestrian improvements based on an investigation of pedestrian movements, right-
of-way ownership, drainage considerations, construction constraints and costs. The study provides a
recommendation for a preferred overall plan to accommodate the safe movement of pedestrians within
this busy corridor.
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road is a relatively high volume, high speed highway having no pedestrian
facilities. This corridor, from the southerly limit at the City/Town municipal boundary to the northerly
limit at Hayts Rd., contains the Cayuga Professional Center and Cayuga Medical Center (CMC) along with
other medical facilities/offices, low and high density residential developments, assisted living facilities, a
museum, the West Hill Fire Station, and a church. These facilities have high community use, generating
significant pedestrian movement within the corridor. Because there are currently no sidewalks,
pedestrians often use the shoulder of the road to walk to and from the City of Ithaca, and internally
within the corridor to the various facilities along Trumansburg Rd. The significant number of pedestrians
using the road shoulder, which has no physical separation from traffic, often travelling at speeds in
excess of the posted 45mph limit, presents a significant safety concern. During the winter, snow storage
along the roadway further reduces the area available for pedestrians to safely travel along this corridor.
2071.001.001/04.2020 -4 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
In addition, pedestrian movements crossing Trumansburg Rd. to access transit services, residential and
employment facilities, and other key destinations warrants examination, especially with only one
existing controlled intersection.
1.1.Study Area
Project Limits: From the City of Ithaca/Town of Ithaca municipal boundary at the south limit, to
Hayts Road at the north limit, a distance of approximately 1.3 miles. This area includes Cayuga
Professional Center, Cayuga Medical Center (hospital), other medical facilities/offices, existing
and proposed low and high density residential developments, assisted living facilities, a
museum, the West Hill Fire Station, and a church.
Exhibit 1-1: Study Area
2071.001.001/04.2020 -5 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
1.2.Study Purpose
The purpose of the project is to study the existing conditions of the NYS Route 96 / Trumansburg
Rd. corridor from a pedestrian perspective and prepare a well-documented plan that presents
alternatives for safe accommodations for pedestrians within the corridor. The study will provide
the first step in a plan of action; essentially readying the project to seek funding for future
design and construction. In fulfilling the project purpose, the following project goals will be
achieved:
1.Engage with the public to gain support for the project and to seek input/feedback
on proposed modifications.
2.Define the means to transport pedestrians along an aethetically pleasing sidewalk in
an efficient, cost effective and safe manner.
3.Create a pedestrian accessible corridor, within the described study limits,
connecting the major destinations within the corridor.
4.Locate pedestrian accommodations within publicly owned property and within the
existing roadway right-of-way where feasible, minimizing the need for
easements/aquisitions.
5.Develop preliminary concepts to address the identified physical constraints and
minimize environmental impacts.
6.Select a preferred alternative that will serve the majority of users in the corridor.
The study will identify other necessary improvements such as required upgrades to existing
traffic controls and associated crosswalks and mid-block crossings. In addtion, the project will
seek to visually transition NYS Route 96 from a suburban roadway at the southern end of the
site to a rural roadway at the north end of the site.
2071.001.001/04.2020 -6 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
Photo 1-1: Trumansburg Road - North end of corridor (South of Harris B Dates Dr.)
Photo 1-2: Trumansburg Road - South end of corridor (South of Hopkins Place)
2071.001.001/04.2020 -7 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
2.0 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
2.1.Overview
Planning is an on-going process, building upon past studies to adjust to new demands of people
and their environment. The meetings conducted for this project were guided by key
stakeholders and community members, following the New York State Community Planning
Principles which suggests that planning be continuous, comprehensive, engaging, and
coordinated. Two public meetings were conducted for this study during which community
members first voiced their needs and concerns along the roadway, and then considered the
proposed alternatives to prioritize which recommendations would best fit the community.
Table 2-1: Sequence of Project Meetings
Date Meeting Description
May 16, 2019 Public Meeting #1 Existing Conditions & Needs Assessment
September 18, 2019 Public Meeting #2 Alternative Concepts & Input
The information presented at the public meetings is included in Appendix C. Formal and
informal public comments were received, which informed the development of alternatives and
design concepts.
An online survey was conducted to gather information related to walking and public transit on
Trumansburg Road/Route 96. The survey was opened in January 2019, with 23 questions
involving barriers and opportunities for pedestrians along the corridor, popular destinations,
connections to the NYS Parks-owned Black Diamond Trail, use of public transit, and general
demographic information. A total of 86 participants have filled out the survey. One out of two
respondents who answered the survey either live on or less than a half mile away from the
study area. Results of the survey are included in Appendix D.
2.2.Survey Highlights
The online survey offered the following insights:
·Over 80% of respondents use the Black Diamond Trail, and would find a connection
between the Trail and Trumansburg Road/Route 96 to be useful.
·The top three reasons people do not walk on Trumansburg Road is due to lack of
continuous sidewalk, inadequate shoulder width, and motor vehicle speeds,
respectively.
·About three out of four respondents would be likely to walk along Trumansburg Road
/Route 96 if pedestrian infrastructure was improved.
2071.001.001/04.2020 -8 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
·An equal number of respondents listed that they would most like to see connections to
the NYS Parks Black Diamond Trail and a continuous sidewalk, at over 40% of the total
participants each. Response highlights are presented in screenshots below.
Question 4
Popular Destinations
2071.001.001/04.2020 -9 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
Question 15
Intersections of Concern
Question 17
Survey Results
2071.001.001/04.2020 -10 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
2.3.Needs and Opportunities
Based on public input, including conversations at public workshops, formal written comments
and the online surveys, as well as input from meetings with Town staff and Town Board
members, there are several themes related to needs/opportunities along the corridor to be
considered when developing alternatives for a more walkable environment, including:
·There are no sidewalks within the corridor, but there are sidewalks south of the corridor
travelling south into the City of Ithaca with a connection indicated as desirable by the
participants in the online survey.
·Many community members living in apartments along the corridor travel to Cayuga
Medical Center, but have no way to walk there. There is an opportunity for sidewalks
from Candlewyck Drive to the Cayuga Medical Center.
·80% of participants in the online survey use the Black Diamond Trail, and would desire a
connection from Trumansburg Road/Route 96, since there are no safe pedestrian
facilities.
·Much of the concern with walking along the corridor is due to high speeds. Many
residents voiced favor for a speed reduction within the corridor to lower the posted
speed of 45mph.
·The bus facility near Cayuga Ridge is suitable for accessing public transit, but other stops
along the corridor are situated in a difficult location, such as behind a drainage ditch.
Facilities to wait for the bus are necessary along the corridor with the opportunity to
replicate and build upon this existing stop.
·There is limited lighting along the corridor. There is a need to consider additional
lighting near future pedestrian facilities and bus stops.
·Public comments included the desire for additional shade along exposed stretches.
·The Ithaca DPW has concern with lane configuration at NYS Route 96/Cayuga Medical /
West Hill Drive intersection. There are no left turn lanes on the NYS Route 96 and
people have experienced accidents at this location.
·There are many bus stop signs on Route 96 that abut a drainage swale. There is a need
for bus pads and improved accommodations for those who use these stops for public
transit.
·Unmarked intersections, limited visibility at turns and angled intersections cause
difficulties for coordination between roadway users, especially with higher speeds.
Identified intersections of concern include Bundy Rd. and Hayts Rd.
·Traffic controls on Trumansburg Road are limited to the signalized intersection at the
Cayuga Medical Center. There may be opportunity to provide additional traffic control
at other intersections.
·There is limited highway lighting along Trumansburg Road, yet many users noted they
walk in the evening, and the roadway is used for commuting. Additional lighting is
needed to facilitate safe coordination between roadway users.
2071.001.001/04.2020 -11 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Refer to Appendix E for maps showing Existing Conditions within the project area. Existing conditions
are presented in further detail within the following sections.
3.1.Existing Land Usage
The corridor includes the Cayuga Medical Center (CMC) along with other medical
facilities/offices, low and high density residential developments, assisted living facilities, a
museum, the West Hill Fire Station, and a church. All of the various locations generate
pedestrian traffic. There are three major sections of the site that can be broken up to more
easily observe where pedestrian traffic is. These sections can be seen on Exhibit 3-1 below.
The first section starting at the south study limit, between Hopkins Place and Bundy Road, has a
number of single-family homes, the Candlewyck Apartments, and Brookdale Ithaca – Assisted
Living. There is a large population of families and elderly people living in this area. This section
contains four bus stops for pedestrians (two northbound and two southbound).
The second section continues north between Bundy Road and the intersection of Trumansburg
Road, West Hill Drive, and Harris B. Dates Drive. Within this section there are many single-family
houses, businesses, and an apartment complex. The major facilities in this section are the
Cayuga Ridge Extended Care, Ithaca Fire Department Station 4, Vegan Epicure, and the Museum
of the Earth. The intersection of Trumansburg Road, West Hill Drive, and Harris B Dates Drive
has the highest amount of pedestrian traffic due to the hospital and apartment houses that are
directly connected to Trumansburg Rd. This section contains three bus stops for pedestrians
(two southbound and one northbound).
The third section of the study area is from the intersection of Trumansburg Rd., W Hill Dr., and
Harris B Dates Dr. north to Hayts Rd. Within this section there are two distinct locations of
traffic, the Northeast Pediatrics Center and Adolescent Medicine and Comfort Keepers Ithaca
(within the Cayuga Professional Center). There are three bus stops in this section (two
northbound and one southbound).
The corridor also contains connections to a variety of residential developments including, single
and multi-family homes.
2071.001.001/04.2020 -12 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
Exhibit 3-2: Existing Notable Locations
Exhibit 3-1: Project Area Map
Section 1: Hopkins Pl. to Bundy Rd. (Yellow)
Section 2: Bundy Rd. to the intersection of West Hill Dr. and Harris B. Dates Dr. Extn. (Blue)
Section 3: Trumansburg Rd., West Hill Dr., and Harris B. Dates Dr. Extn. to Hayts Rd. (Green)
2071.001.001/04.2020 -13 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
3.2.Environmental Assessment
A preliminary environmental assessment was completed to understand the impacts/context for
potential alternatives. Refer to Figure 3 of Appendix E for a map showing Natural Resources.
Threatened & Endangered Species
Suitable roosting and foraging habitat for the threatened northern long eared bat, including
trees greater than 3 inches in DBH and trees near surface water resources, is present within the
project site’s proposed limits of disturbance. Tree clearing is the main concern related to this
species that is associated with this project. Tree removals will occur during NYSDEC’s tree
cutting window for the protection of bats (November 1 – March 31) to avoid impacts to roosting
bat species. Due to the minimal amount of trees to be removed for potential pedestrian
infrastructure in comparison to the surrounding habitat, the proposed project may affect, but is
not likely to adversely affect the long eared bat species.
Rare Wildlife Species
The Environmental Resource Mapper provided by the NYS Department of Conservation
(NYSDEC), indicates that the Project Area exists within two rare animal buffer zones due to
proximity of the corridor to Cayuga Lake. One of these rare species is Lake Sturgeon from just
north of Cayuga Ridge to the southern boundary at Cliff Street. Stormwater run-off flowing into
drainage swales or catch basins may affect the quality of water entering the lake from these
systems. The corridor is also within a Significant Waterfowl Winter Concentration Area.
Depth to Ground Water
Over 95% of the corridor is at least 20 inches depth to the water table, with 25% greater than 6
feet depth. The other 5% is at least 15 inches to the water table. This shallow area occurs in
front of the Museum of the Earth towards the southeast drive aisle.
Surface Water
Two tributaries into Cayuga Lake intersect the Project Area. These two creeks include Williams
Brook Creek and another unnamed stream. Both streams are classified as class “C,” meaning
they are not regulated by the NYSDEC. These systems must be considered during design to
consider additional stormwater being created by the project, addressing any potential flooding
issues, and subsequent impacts to local streams and Cayuga Lake.
State Wetlands
Review of the NYSDEC Environmental Resource Mapper, and GIS data, identified no state
regulated wetlands within the Project Area.
Federal Wetlands
Review of the Fish & Wildlife Service Mapper, through the Federal Wetland Inventory, and
verification with GIS data, identified no federally regulated wetlands within the Project Area.
2071.001.001/04.2020 -14 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
Floodplains
The Federal Emergency Mapping Assessment (FEMA) indicates the entirety of the Project Area is
classified as “X,” meaning that it is not within a 100-year or 500-year flood zone.
Natural & Historic Resources
There is one building registered under the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) as shown
on the Cultural Resource Information System Mapping. This includes the Chapel & Schoolhouse
just south of Hayts Road at 1296-1298 Trumansburg Rd. In addition, the association with Cayuga
Lake places the entirety of the Project Area within the Archaeologically Sensitive zone.
Although it is not listed on the NRHP, the old tavern site at 1105 Trumansburg Road is
considered to be a national historic marker, which is locally significant and is maintained by the
current resident.
Parks
Several parks are located near the Project Area toward the City of Ithaca, with the major
influence of the New York State Parks (NYS Parks) Black Diamond Trail. The Black Diamond Trail
parallels Trumansburg Road/Route 96 and Cayuga Lake, providing an alternative path for
bicyclists, pedestrians, and hikers between the City of Ithaca and Taughannock Falls State Park.
This study suggests opportunities to connect to this Trail as an alternative means of walking into
or out of the City. Besides this potential connection to the corridor, two other parks are located
short distances from the corridor. These include Hayts Cemetery on Hayts Road and Cass Park
near the Cayuga Inlet.
Noise
Many single family homes and apartment complexes exist along the corridor. These groups are
the most susceptible to noise disruption. The indicated potential pedestrian improvements will
not adversely affect noise in the corridor beyond the construction phase, and may aid in
reducing noise resulting from vehicular traffic by offering an alternative mode of transportation.
Visual Impacts
The Town of Ithaca identifies the view from Trumansburg Road within its Top 10 scenic
locations, travelling south past the Museum of the Earth and looking towards East Hill and
Cornell across the Cayuga Lake valley (Town of Ithaca Scenic Views, 2016).
2071.001.001/04.2020 -15 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
3.3.Future Plans in Project Area
A review of the future plans for the roadway and other existing or proposed projects was
undertaken with input from the Town. A summary of potential future plans that may influence
the project include:
·The Town has recently completed a reconstruction project along Bundy Rd. While this
project focused primarily on drainage improvements, the approaching skew of Bundy
Road at the intersection with Trumansburg Rd. was also improved. As noted in Section
6.4.1, this study recommends the incorporation of new cross-walks at this intersection,
as well as a proposed bus shelter on the northeast side of Trumansburg Road at this
intersection.
·Ithaca Town Homes (Holochuck Homes) is an approved subdivision with access to
Trumansburg Road north of the intersection with Bundy Road. Although this subdivision
may not proceed in its current configuration, future development is anticipated based
on current zoning and approvals. The study includes this proposed subdivision within its
analysis.
·Black Diamond Trail – For the past two years, the Cayuga Medical Center has submitted
applications for a CFA grant for a trail connection from the Black Diamond Trail to
Trumansburg Road at Harris B. Dates Blvd. To date, this grant application has been
unsuccessful, notwithstanding the dedication of the hospital and wider community to
realize the connection of this property. This connection to the hospital would use most
of the old road on the hospital property (shown as Option 1 on Figure 2 of Appendix A).
2071.001.001/04.2020 -16 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
4.0 TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
4.1.Transportation Network
4.1.1.Overview
NYS Route 96 (Trumansburg Road) is a New York State Department of Transportation
(NYSDOT) owned and maintained highway that is functionally classified as an Urban
Minor Arterial with an average daily traffic (ADT) flow of 8,286 vehicles per day (VPD) as
of 2013. The study corridor is about 1.3 miles long. Beginning at the south study limit,
at the intersection of Hopkins Pl. and Bundy Rd. the road consists of two 12 ft. wide
travel lanes, one on each side, with approximately 6 ft. wide shoulders on each side.
These dimensions for the lanes appear to be consistent throughout the corridor except
for the intersection at Trumansburg Rd., West Hill Dr., and Harris B. Dates Dr. At this
intersection, in the northbound direction, there is a 12 ft. wide turning lane and a 4 ft.
wide shoulder, after the intersection the roadway returns to the 12 ft. wide lane with
approximately 6 ft. wide shoulder. The shoulder width varies within the study area, from
4-ft at the narrowest point up to 8-ft at its widest. The speed limit in this section of the
road is 45 mph in both the northbound and southbound lanes. In the northbound
direction the speed limit increases to 55 mph north of the study area. In the southbound
direction the speed limit decreases to 30 mph within the City of Ithaca.
The only traffic signal within the study area is located at the intersection of
Trumansburg Rd., W Hill Dr., and Harris B Dates Dr. This is the main entrance of the
Cayuga Medical Center. This intersection is located approximately 720 feet south of the
Cayuga Professional Center and approximately 3,330 feet north of the Bundy Rd.
intersection. The intersection provides a signalized crossing for pedestrians across NYS
Route 96 / Trumansburg Rd. and across Harris B. Dates Dr. There is no signage on the
corridor that supports pedestrian and bicycles use.
2071.001.001/04.2020 -17 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
Photo 3-1:Harris B Dates Intersection
4.1.2.Roadway Inventory
The project corridor was analyzed to determine the characteristics of each of the key
roadways and intersections within the project limits. This information is used in the
capacity analysis and accident analysis to determine the potential impacts that
proposed developments and facility improvements would have on the existing corridor.
Additional intersections and facilities may be present within the project corridor but
were not included in the traffic study or data collection and therefore are not included
in the following descriptions. The terrain throughout the corridor limits assumed to be
rolling, with no sight distance limitations. The following table presents the
characteristics of the roadways for key intersections that were identified with input
from Town for inclusion in the analysis.
2071.001.001/04.2020 -18 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
Table 4-1: Roadway Characteristics
Intersection Hayts Road West Hill Drive Harris B. Dates
Drive
Hopkins Pl. /
Campbell Ave.
Ownership /
Maintenance
Tompkins County
Department of
Public Works
Town of Ithaca Town of Ithaca Town of Ithaca
Classification Local road Local road Local road Local road
Designated Access Hwy?No No No No
Part of the National
Highway System (NHS)?
No No No No
Lanes 2-lane (one lane
in each direction)
3-lane (one
westbound and
two eastbound
and an 8’ painted
median between
the left and
right/straight
eastbound lanes)
3-lane (two
westbound and
one eastbound)
2-lane (one lane
in each direction)
Approximate Widths 11ft. travel lane;
2ft. unpaved
shoulders
10ft. travel lane;
4ft. paved
shoulders
12ft travel lanes;
4ft wide paved
shoulder; 9ft
wide curbed
median island
10ft. travel lane;
2ft. unpaved
shoulders
Posted Speed Limit 45mph 30mph None posted
(Assumed to be
30mph)
30mph
4.1.3.Intersection Inventory
The intersection of Trumansburg Rd. and Hayts Rd./Cayuga Professional Center
driveway was analyzed as two separate intersections due to the approach geometry.
Both side streets are controlled by a single stop sign allowing for traffic on Trumansburg
Rd. to flow freely. Each approach lane is composed of a single approach permitting all
turning movements. No pedestrian accommodations exist at this intersection to
improve/enhance pedestrian safety.
The intersection of Trumansburg Rd. and Harris B. Dates Dr./West Hill Dr. is a four-way,
semi-actuated signalized location. The southbound approach of Trumansburg Rd
consists of a single lane controlling all turning movements while the northbound
approach consists of a thru/left turn lane and a designated right turn lane. Both the
eastbound (West Hill Dr.) and westbound (Harris B. Dates Dr.) approach are two lane
2071.001.001/04.2020 -19 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
approaches accommodating a designated left turn lane and a thru/right turn lane. The
traffic signal is programmed to allow protected permitted left turn phasing for
eastbound and westbound approaches while retaining permitted phasing for the
mainline. Pedestrian curb ramps and signals are present allowing for pedestrian access
from the Cayuga Medical Center to the development adjacent to W Hill Dr., however
sidewalks are absent along Trumansburg Rd.
The intersection of Trumansburg Rd. and Hopkins Pl. / Campbell Ave. is an unsignalized
intersection with a stop sign controlling the Campbell Dr. approach; Trumansburg Rd.
retains free flowing and permitted turning movements with no restrictions. All
approaches are constructed with a single lane in each direction for all turning
movements. No pedestrian accommodations exist at this intersection to
improve/enhance pedestrian safety.
4.2.Traffic Data and Analysis
4.2.1.Overview
Intersection turning movement counts were collected in July of 2018 at three key
intersections previously determined, based on direction from the Town of Ithaca. The
turning movement counts collected data to determine the peak hour for traffic volumes
for the morning (6:00am-9:00am), Noon (11:30am-1:30pm), and evening (3:30pm-
6:30pm). The counted intersections are:
·Trumansburg Road & Hayts Road/Cayuga Medical office access
·Trumansburg Road & Harris B Dates Drive/W Hill Drive
·Trumansburg Road & Hopkins Pl / Campbell Avenue
Existing traffic signal data for the Trumansburg Rd. & Harris B Dates Dr. /W Hill Dr.
intersection were obtained through documents provided from the Town of Ithaca which
previously studied this corridor in 2009. Additional traffic volume data was utilized in
the accident analysis and obtained from the NYSDOT traffic data viewer. In order to
determine the efficiency of the Trumansburg Rd. Corridor and potential generation
impacts from proposed residential and commercial developments, an existing condition
capacity analysis, trip generation and distribution study, as well as a future condition
capacity analysis, and accident analysis was performed. These procedures are outlined
in the following sections to assist in identifying areas of concern. Traffic volume, speed
and classification data was also reviewed, as presented in Section 5.1.
2071.001.001/04.2020 -20 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
4.2.2.Capacity Analysis - Analysis and Study Methodology
To accurately quantify the efficiency of existing traffic operations at the intersections
previously mentioned, a capacity analysis is required. The capacity analysis consists of
classifying intersection efficiency by determining a Level of Service (LOS), which
characterizes operational conditions based on motorist and passenger perception. The
descriptions of individual levels of service take into consideration factors such as speed,
travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, and comfort and convenience.
The LOS of an intersection is defined in terms of delay (in seconds) and is in relation to
the average time each vehicle is stopped, for a 15 minute analysis period (determined
by the peak hour factor). LOS ranges from “A” to “F” where a LOS “A” is considered to
be free flowing traffic often witnessed on rural roads with minimal to no traffic and a
LOS “F” could be related to downtown cities during rush hour traffic where extended
delays and limited movement is allowed. Generally speaking, a LOS of “D” is considered
acceptable, however LOS of “C” is more desirable since delays beyond “C” often are
associated with driver discomfort. The following table illustrates the intersection LOS
ratings for typical signalized and unsignalized intersections based on time of delay per
vehicle.
Table 4-2: Level of Service (LOS) Criteria for Intersections
LOS Description Delay in Seconds
(Signalized)
Delay in Seconds
(Unsignalized)
A Little or no delay <= 10.0 <= 10.0
B Minor, Short delay > 10 to 20 > 10 to 15
C Average delay > 20 to 35 > 15 to 25
D Long, but acceptable delay > 35 to 55 > 25 to 35
E Long, Unacceptable delay > 55 to 80 > 35 to 50
F Long, Unacceptable delays > 80 > 50
A highway capacity analysis was performed for each intersection utilizing Synchro 9
Traffic analysis software which is an industry accepted standard for the evaluation of
signalized and unsignalized intersections based on methodologies and equations
developed in the 2000 & 2010 Highway Capacity Manual. The following factors were
considered as inputs for the program:
·Traffic volumes at each approach and turning movement
·Percentage of heavy vehicles witnessed
·Peak Hour Factor for each approach
·Traffic control (i.e. stop sign, traffic signal, yield)
·Road Geometry (i.e. lane designation, lane and shoulder widths)
·Approach speed
2071.001.001/04.2020 -21 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
A summary of the existing intersection conditions (AM, Noon, and PM peak hours) LOS
is provided in the Table below.
Table 4-3: Existing Traffic Volumes - 2018 Existing Conditions
Intersection Level of Service and Delays (Sec)
Intersection Approach AM Peak Hour Noon Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Trumansburg
Rd & Hayts
Rd
Northbound All
Movements A (8.7)A (8.1)A (8.2)
Southbound All
Movements A (0.0)A (0.0)A (0.0)
Eastbound All
Movements B (13.7)B (11.0)B (11.0)
Overall Intersection A (1.4)A (1.2)A (1.0)
Trumansburg
Rd & Cayuga
Professional
Center
Driveway
Northbound All
Movements A (0.0)A (0.0)A (0.0)
Southbound All
Movements A (7.8)A (8.1)A (9.4)
Westbound All
Movements C (16.3)C (16.2)C (22.3)
Overall Intersection A (0.5)A (1.7)A (1.5)
Trumansburg
Rd & Harris B
Dates Dr./W
Hill Dr.
Northbound Thru/Left A (4.8)A (3.2)B (11.3)
Northbound Right A (1.2)A (1.1)A (1.5)
Southbound All
Movements A (7.7)A (3.2)A (8.1)
Eastbound Left C (21.0)C (21.0)B (19.8)
Eastbound Thru/Right A (0.2)B (15.1)A (0.4)
Westbound Left C (28.6)C (21.5)D (38.4)
Westbound Thru/Right B (16.5)B (15.1)B (14.7)
Overall Intersection A (7.6)A (4.1)B (14.1)
Trumansburg
Rd & Hopkins
Pl / Campbell
Ave
Northbound All
Movements A (0.0)A (8.6)A (9.0)
Southbound All
Movements A (0.0)A (0.0)A (0.0)
Eastbound All
Movements D (25.2)C (22.2)E (29.7)
Overall Intersection A (0.8)A (0.8)A (1.0)
2071.001.001/04.2020 -22 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
Based on the capacity analysis results for the existing studied intersections, the only
intersection which operates at an unacceptable LOS is Hopkins Pl., which has LOS E for
eastbound movements onto Trumansburg Rd.
4.2.3.Trip Generation and Distribution
To understand future mitigation requirements necessary to retain acceptable LOS
values, a trip generation and distribution study was performed based on the proposed
construction of commercial and residential developments adjacent to the Trumansburg
Rd. corridor. This section details the how the proposed traffic capacity analysis was
performed along with volume, speed and classification for the overall corridor, obtained
from NYSDOT traffic data.
Data counts are available from 2016 within the Trumansburg Road corridor at a location
near Woolf Ln. It is noted that this data is from a location approximately one mile north
of the project site, within a section of Trumansburg Road with a posted speed of 55mph.
The 85th percentile corridor speed based on this data is 57mph and 59mpg in the
northbound and southbound directions, respectively. Additional data counts were
available within the project site (between Bundy Rd. and Harris B. Dates Dr.) based on
analysis undertaken for the recent Holochuck Homes development traffic study, which
reports an 85th percentile corridor speed of 47mph northbound and 49mph
southbound. Refer to Table 5-2, which presents the design criteria, including the
assumed design speed of 50mph based on review of the available data.
Within the project corridor, two separate developments are proposed which would
increase traffic along Trumansburg Road. To determine the potential impacts the
proposed developments would generate throughout the project corridor and adjacent
intersections, a trip generation study was performed to calculate traffic volumes which
travel to and from the development sites. The generated traffic volumes are calculated
utilizing the 10th Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip
Generation Manual which is an accepted industry standard for calculating expected
traffic volumes generated when considering he proposed development land usage.
Previously, Keystone Associates submitted a conceptual site plan to the Town of Ithaca
for a proposed residential development (Ithaca Townhomes / Holochuck Homes) with
access connecting to the existing School of Massage driveway access and another access
drive located approximately 500ft North of Bundy Road. The submitted site plan
proposes 20 multifamily buildings equating to 106 individual units available for
residence. Therefore, ITE Land Use Code 220 – Low Rise Multi-Family Housing was
determined to be the most applicable Land Use as it provides data for attached two to
three story residential dwellings with consideration for the total amount of units
2071.001.001/04.2020 -23 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
available. The results of this analysis determined that the proposed Townhomes is
expected to generate 50 trips during the AM Peak Hour and 62 trips during the PM Peak
Hour.
Additionally, Cornell University owns property on the west side of Trumansburg Road
between Harris B. Dates Drive and Bundy Road and anticipates developing this parcel
into commercial properties. However, this parcel does not have a proposed site plan to
base select of the applicable Trip Generation Land Use Code. Therefore to be
conservative, it is anticipated that the parcel would be developed into a subdivision
housing development (LUC-210 - Single Family Detached Housing) with available plots
for office complexes (LUC-710 – General Office Building which includes medical, tax, and
other professional offices including potential for restaurants). Based on adjacent
residential properties and parcel size, it is assumed that the subdivision would construct
30 single family households; the general office building(s) is assumed to consume
approximately 35,000SF (derived from the adjacent Cayuga Professional Center office
located within the project limits). The results of this analysis determined the Cornell
Property is assumed to generate 85 trips during the AM Peak Hour and 74 trips during
the PM Peak Hour. The calculations for the number of trips resulting from the ITE Trip
Generation analysis is summarized in the Table below:
Table 4-4: Trip Generation Summary - Existing
Trip distribution describes the direction in which traffic is originated from and the
direction these vehicles are headed. Trips generated by the proposed projects were
distributed based on anticipated travel routes derived from existing peak hour traffic
patterns observed through the turning movement counts performed at the three key
intersections within the corridor. The detailed proposed trip distribution figure is
attached in Appendix F.
Trips Generated
Amenity Land Use
Code Factors Weekday AM Peak
Hour
Weekday PM Peak
Hour
Ithaca
Townhomes 220 106 Dwelling
Units
50 Vehicles
(12 Enter, 38 Exit)
62 Vehicles
(39 Enter, 23 Exit)
Cornell
Property -
Residential
210 30 Households 26 Vehicles
(7 Enter, 19 Exit)
32 Vehicles
(20 Enter, 12 Exit)
Cornell
Property -
General Office
710 35,000 SF
(35 kSF)
59 Vehicles
(51 Enter, 8 Exit)
42 Vehicles
(7 Enter, 35 Exit)
2071.001.001/04.2020 -24 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
In general, 25% of traffic is distributed Northbound (towards Trumansburg) while 75% of
traffic is distributed Southbound to Ithaca, from and to each proposed development site
during the AM peak hours. The direction of flow is reversed for PM peak hour, with 75%
of traffic distributed Northbound away from the City. This assumption is based on the
existing traffic patterns and engineering judgement primarily considering the proposing
residential properties will not increase job demand in surrounding areas. Therefore,
traffic would be focused on travelling to and from more urbanized areas and city centers
during the AM and PM peak hours. It is noted that the ITE Trip Generation Manuals do
not provide information regarding expected trips generated during the Noon peak hour,
therefore it has been excluded from this analysis assuming majority of traffic is
travelling during the two daily peak hours (AM and PM) accepted as the industry
standards.
4.2.4.Future Build (2039) Traffic Volumes and Capacity Analysis
To fully understand the impacts of the proposed Ithaca Townhomes and Cornell
University property developments, a future conditions analysis was performed. In
general, a conservative 1.0% annual growth rate was applied to existing turning
movement data to forecast the future traffic volumes for No Build and Build scenarios;
the annual growth rate was determined utilizing historical traffic data made available by
the NYSDOT. In accordance with the NYSDOT Highway Design Manual, the Estimated
Time of Completion (ETC) is determined to be 20 years in the future based on the nature
of this project and the proposed developments. The base year of 2019 was used, with a
future ETC of 2039.
To serve as the basis of expected impacts, it is assumed the No Build ETC+20 (2039)
traffic volumes serve as the null alternative. The forecasted No Build ETC+20 traffic
volumes are only influenced by the annual growth rate, and do not take into
consideration development of adjacent parcels. The Build ETC+20 condition considers
the annual growth rate along with the volumes calculated for the two proposed
developments. Traffic volume and distribution diagrams are provided in Appendix F
which outline the No-Build and Build traffic volumes used within the Synchro 9 capacity
analysis software. A summary of the forecasted level of service for the studied
intersections are provided on Table 4-5.
2071.001.001/04.2020 -25 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
Table 4-5: ETC+20 (2039) Forecasted Traffic Volumes
No Build/Build Conditions Intersection Level of Service and Delays (Sec)
4.2.5.Summary
The capacity analysis for the 2039 Build scenarios conclude each intersection and
corresponding movements continue to operate at an acceptable Level of Service (LOS D
or better), with the exception of the Hopkins Pl / Campbell Drive approach which is
expected to operate at LOS E and F for AM and PM peak hour, respectively. It is noted
that the Hopkins Pl / Campbell Rd. LOS for PM peak-hour is forecast at LOS F, which is
worse than the current LOS E.
Intersection Approach AM No-Build
Peak Hour
AM Build Peak
Hour
PM No-Build
Peak Hour
PM Build Peak
Hour
Trumansburg Rd
& Hayts Rd
Northbound (all movements)A (9.2)A (9.3)A (8.4)A (8.4)
Southbound (all movements)A (0.0)A (0.0)A (0.0)A (0.0)
Eastbound (all movements)C (16.6)C (16.8)B (12.7)B (12.8)
Overall Intersection A (1.6)A (1.6)A (1.1)A (1.1)
Trumansburg Rd
& Cayuga
Professional
Center Driveway
Northbound (all movements)A (0.0)A (0.0)A (0.0)A (0.0)
Southbound (all movements)A (8.0)A (8.0)A (9.8)A (9.8)
Westbound (all movements)C (21.2)C (21.5)D (27.8)D (28.7)
Overall Intersection A (0.5)A (0.5)A (1.8)A (1.9)
Trumansburg Rd
& Harris B Dates
Dr./W Hill Dr.
Northbound Thru/Left A (5.1)A (5.5)B (13.3)B (13.7)
Northbound Right A (1.2)A (1.3)A (1.7)A (2.0)
Southbound All Movements A (9.2)B (10.5)A (8.8)A (8.9)
Eastbound Left B (20.0)B (20.0)B (19.8)B (19.8)
Eastbound Thru/Right A (0.3)A (0.3)A (0.5)A (0.5)
Westbound Left C (28.7)C (29.4)D (42.7)D (45.1)
Westbound Thru/Right B (16.3)B (16.6)B (14.5)B (14.4)
Overall Intersection A (8.4)A (9.3)B (15.9)B (16.5)
Trumansburg Rd
& Hopkins /
Campbell Ave
Northbound Thru/Left A (0.0)A (0.0)A (9.4)A (9.6)
Southbound Thru/Right A (0.0)A (0.0)A (0.0)A (0.0)
Eastbound Left/Right D (31.9)E (40.3)F (56.2)F (77.6)
Overall A (1.0)A (1.4)A (1.4)A (2.1)
2071.001.001/04.2020 -26 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
In general, LOS and observed vehicle delays are expected to degrade with the
development of the Ithaca Townhomes and Cornell University property generating
additional traffic, nevertheless the effects caused by these developments are not
expected to have a significant impact the Trumansburg Rd. corridor. Traffic control or
intersection geometric mitigation efforts are not warranted solely based on the LOS
analysis presented above for the purpose of retaining adequate intersection LOS. It
should be noted that future development will necessitate analysis that is beyond the
scope of this project (i.e., unprotected turning lane, queing at proposed access
locations, etc.) which may indicate future mitigation efforts.
4.3.Accident Data and Analysis
Accident data was provided by the Town of Ithaca for the most recent available three year
period (2014-2016) to determine accident trends within the Trumansburg Rd. project corridor
and whether existing roadway characteristics increase the probability of accident occurrences at
intersections and within road segments. The data included all accidents along Trumansburg Rd.
from Wilkins Rd., south to the Ithaca Town Line; to specifically focus on the study area, all data
outside of 0.1 miles of the project corridor was negated from this analysis. Accidents which were
not considered to be related to an intersection based on engineering judgement were
categorized as a link/corridor accident for the purpose of accident rate calculations.
2071.001.001/04.2020 -27 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
Table 4-6: Accident Severity
According to the data received, there were a total of 64 accidents that occurred during the 3-
year time period. While the majority of accidents resulted in property damage (over $500 in
estimated repairs) and non-reportable incidents (under $500 in estimated repairs), it is
important to note that a pedestrian fatality was recorded at the intersection of Trumansburg Rd.
and Hopkins Pl / Campbell Ave.Table 4-6 illustrates the accident summary and severity at each
location identified within the project limits.
Table 4-7: Accident Rate Comparison - Accident Rates per Million Entering Vehicles (MEV) / Accident
Rates per Million Vehicle Miles (MVM)
Link / Intersection of Accident Fatality Personal
Injury
Property
Damage Only Non-Reportable Total
Intersection Trumansburg Rd &
Hayts Rd 0 0 5 0 5
Intersection Trumansburg Rd &
Harris B Dates Blvd 0 0 11 5 16
Intersection Trumansburg Rd &
Bundy Rd 0 0 3 2 5
Intersection Trumansburg Rd &
Hopkins Pl / Campbell Ave 1 0 2 0 3
Link Trumansburg Rd from Hayts
Rd to Hopkins Pl / Campbell Ave 0 1 21 13 35
Overall Project 1 1 42 20 64
Link / Intersection of Crash No.
Crashes Crash Rate NYS Statewide
Average Ratio
Intersection – Hayts Rd 5 0.58 (Acc/MEV)0.18 (Acc/MEV)3.22
Intersection – Harris B Dates Blvd 16 1.38 (Acc/MEV)0.25 (Acc/MEV)5.52
Intersection – Bundy Rd 5 0.54 (Acc/MEV)0.18 (Acc/MEV)3.00
Intersection Candlewyk Apt driveway 0 n/a 0.18 (Acc/MEV)n/a
Intersection – Hopkins Pl / Campbell Ave 3 0.25 (Acc/MEV)0.18 (Acc/MEV)1.56
Link Trumansburg Rd from Hayts Rd to
Campbell Ave 35 3.19 (Acc/MVM) 2.23(Acc/MVM)1.43
Overall Project 64 4.49 (Acc/MVM)3.5 (Acc/MVM)1.28
2071.001.001/04.2020 -28 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
Accidents are quantified as intersection or link/corridor related incidents when considering type,
proximity to intersections, and vehicular movements; accident rates are calculated based on
these two categories and compared to the NYSDOT Statewide Average Accident Rate.
Intersection accident rates are calculated as accidents per million entering vehicles (acc/mev)
which is dependent on the volume of vehicles entering that specific intersection. Link/corridor
accident rates are calculated as accident per million vehicle miles (acc/mvm) and derived based
on the studied project length and Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) which travels along
Trumansburg Rd. The accident rates for each studied intersection and Trumansburg Rd. corridor
are illustrated in the table above.
4.3.1.Summary
Each intersection exhibits a higher accident rate than the statewide average for similar
facilities. Since it is anticipated that no sight distance issues are present within the
corridor, additional factors could be contributing to accidents in excessive of the
statewide average.
As part of the accident analysis, collision diagrams and associated summary sheets were
developed. Clusters of accidents or patterns implying inadequate geometrics, or other
safety problems were identified. Diagrams and summary data are included in
Appendix F.
Table 4-8 summarizes the breakdown of accidents by type to better facilitate an
understanding of occurrences at each location.
2071.001.001/04.2020 -29 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
Table 4-8: Accident Summary
The breakdown at each studied intersection and corridor concluded that rear end
accidents and accidents involving animals account for over 67% of all accident types
within the project limits. Due to the presence of rural land adjacent to Trumansburg Rd.,
animal interference is a common occurrence and at times may be unavoidable;
additional safety measures can be implemented to improve driver visibility, especially at
night, such as increasing lighting and providing clear zone areas within right-of-way
limits. Rear end accidents are often associated with driver error (following too closely,
driver inattention, etc.) and poor driving conditions (snow, ice, rain, etc.) which hinder a
motorists ability to react in avoiding collisions. However, the high level of rear end
accidents at the Trumansburg Rd. and Harris B Dates Blvd. appears to warrant further
consideration.
Link/Intersection of
Accident Rear EndAnimalPedestrianOvertakingRight TurnLeft TurnFixed ObjectEmbankmentTotal
Intersection
Trumansburg Rd &
Haytes Rd
3 ------2 5
Intersection
Trumansburg Rd &
Harris B Dates Blvd
8 4 -1 1 1 1 -16
Intersection
Trumansburg Rd &
Bundy Rd
2 2 --1 ---5
Intersection
Trumansburg Rd &
Candlewyck Park
--------
Intersection of
Trumansburg Rd &
Campbell Ave
1 -1 1 ----3
Link Trumansburg Rd
from Haytes Rd to
Campbell Ave
5 18 -2 2 1 1 6 35
Overall 19 24 1 4 4 2 2 8 64
2071.001.001/04.2020 -30 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
The accident analysis determined the Trumansburg Rd. and Harris B Dates Blvd.
intersection has an especially high number of accidents. The amount of vehicles
entering the intersection at this location exceeds any other intersection within the
project corridor, naturally resulting in a higher rate, however the accident rate for this
intersection is approx. five times higher than the statewide average for similar facilities.
Investigation of this intersection indicated that over 50% of accidents at this location are
due to Rear End incidents; the majority of which occur on the southbound approach of
Trumansburg Rd. The results of the accident analysis indicate inadequate geometrics at
this intersection. The lane geometry for this approach contains a single lane to
accommodate all turning movements; due to the proximity of the adjacent Cayuga
Medical Center, it is anticipated that accidents occurred as left turning vehicles were
stopped in traffic generating traffic queues. Recommendations for modifications to
geometry for this approach are discussed in Section 5.2.5.1.
4.4.Pedestrian Data and Analysis
Identifying needs and concerns of pedestrian accessibility along the Trumansburg Rd. corridor is
a primary component of this report. Public meeting and community survey responses indicate
that the majority of residents do not consider Trumansburg Rd. a viable walking route due to
the lack of pedestrian facilities such as sidewalks, crosswalks, and traffic signals. Additionally,
excessive vehicle speeds and low shoulders, which force pedestrians to walk closer to vehicle
paths, generate pedestrian perceptions of unsafe walking conditions. The accident analysis
detailed previously in this report identified one fatal pedestrian accident which occurred at the
intersection of Trumansburg Rd. and Hopkins Pl. / Campbell Ave., an unsignalized intersection
where no pedestrian accommodations are available. The Trumansburg Rd. and Harris B. Dates
Dr. intersection is the only location within project limits that contains pedestrian facilities,
including designated crosswalks and ADA compliant landings with detectable warning units and
pedestrian signals.
To quantify the existing state of pedestrian accessibility, a pedestrian level of service analysis
was performed utilizing Synchro 9 capacity analysis software, similar to the vehicular LOS
described in Section 4.2 of this report.
4.4.1.Pedestrian level of service analysis
Pedestrian LOS is calculated as average delay per pedestrian, described as the
measurement of pedestrian flow rate and delay experienced caused by waiting for gaps
in traffic to safely cross the roadway. Primarily, factors which determine pedestrian
delay observed at intersections are volume of pedestrians, volume of vehicles, length of
crossings, walking speed, walking path width, and vehicle speeds. The table below
represents the Pedestrian LOS score ranges and their associated LOS grade.
2071.001.001/04.2020 -31 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
Table 4-9: Level of Service (LOS) Criteria for Signalized Pedestrian Facilities
LOS Description Delay in Seconds
(Signalized)
Delay in Seconds
(Unsignalized)
A Little or no delay X <= 10 X <= 5
B Minor, Short delay 10 < X <= 20 5 < X <= 10
C Average delay 20 < X <= 30 10 < X <= 20
D Long, but acceptable
delay 30 < X <= 40 20 < X <= 30
E Long, Unacceptable
delay 40 < X <= 60 30 < X <= 45
F Long, Unacceptable
delays X > 60 X > 45
The existing corridor was analyzed to determine the pedestrian level of service at each
intersection studied within the project corridor. Refer to
Table 4-10 for a summary of existing condition pedestrian LOS.
Currently, no intersection exhibits acceptable pedestrian LOS results. A pedestrian LOS
of E and F is indicated for all intersections, with the exception of Trumansburg Rd. &
Hayts Rd. noon peak hour, which was a level D. Although levels A to D are generally
considered acceptable, the lack of pedestrian facilities at this location results in this
intersection being evaluated as ‘unacceptable’.
The Pedestrian LOS presented in Table 4-10 considers the delay experienced while
waiting for pedestrian indications at a given location (i.e., gap analysis). The delay
experienced by pedestrians at the intersection of Trumansburg Rd. & Harris B Dates Dr.
is primarily due to existing traffic signal phasing and available walk time; whereas the
delay at each unsignalized intersection exhibits an unacceptable pedestrian LOS due to
high traffic volumes and excessive speeds, which decrease gaps in traffic flow thus
hindering pedestrian crossing.
A Crosswalk LOS differs from Pedestrian LOS at a controlled intersection, representing
the accessibility/safety of pedestrians while crossing the roadway, and excluding
consideration of delay awaiting signaled crossing. The intersection of Trumansburg Rd.
& Harris B Dates Dr. retains a Crosswalk LOS of B. The LOS of B is indicative of the travel
distance and space available to a pedestrian at the signalized crossing, while reflecting
the remaining potential for pedestrian conflict with cars (i.e., associated with right-hand
turning movements). Improvements to Pedestrian LOS and Crosswalk LOS at this
intersection may be considered as part of intersection modifications at Trumansburg Rd.
& Harris B Dates Dr., as discussed in Section 5.2.5.
2071.001.001/04.2020 -32 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
Although Pedestrian LOS is considered unacceptable at unsignalized intersections,
additional mid-block crossings or signalized intersections, that would inhibit traffic flow
within this commuter roadway, are not recommended. However, the addition of
sidewalks on both sides of the roadway (Alternative 3,Section 5.2) will reduce the need
for crossing at unsignalized locations. The exception to this is at Bundy Road, where a
new cross walk is recommended, as described in Section 6.4.1.
In addition to sidewalks, pedestrian accessibility at these unsignalized crossings would
be improved by reducing the vehicular speed within the project corridor, in turn
decreasing pedestrian delay.
Table 4-10: Existing Condition Pedestrian Level of Services (LOS) Gap Analysis
Model /
Alternative
Study Intersection
Trumansburg
Rd & Hayts Rd
Trumansburg
Rd & Cayuga
Professional
Center
Trumansburg Rd
& Harris B Dates
Blvd
Trumansburg
Rd & Campbell
Ave
AM Peak Hour LOS E
(39.8)
LOS F
(45.1)
LOS E
(45.0)
LOS F
(78.8)
Noon Peak
Hour
LOS D
(28.1)
LOS E
(33.3)
LOS E
(45.0)
LOS F
(68.1)
PM Peak Hour LOS F
(67.5)
LOS F
(84.3)
LOS E
(45.0)
LOS F
(178.2)
4.4.2.Camera Data
Time-lapse cameras are an important tool for understanding current active
transportation patterns on a site-specific level, by enabling 24-hours of data to be
analyzed in a matter of hours. They provide both quantitative and qualitative
information, which can be developed into visuals that detail pedestrian, jogger, bicyclist,
and public transit user movements and usage trends. These findings can clearly highlight
needs and inform recommendations to improve the active transportation infrastructure
and facilities at particular locations. For this project, time-lapse cameras were set up at
three priority intersections along NYS Route 96 within the project area:
·Cayuga Professional Center Drive Intersection
·West Hill / Harris B. Dates Drive Intersection
·Bundy Road Intersection
2071.001.001/04.2020 -33 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
The cameras recorded images at 3-second intervals for 24-
hour time periods on Monday, May 6th, 2019, and Saturday,
May 11th, 2019. Both of these dates represented typical sunny
spring days with temperatures between 52°F and 70°F.
Between the two dates, a total of 100 pedestrians and 20
bicyclists were observed at these intersections, with 19 of the
pedestrians using the TCAT bus stops. Refer to Appendix C for
exhibits showing detailed findings for each intersection based
on weekday and weekend observations.
As illustrated by the exhibits, far more pedestrians passed by
these intersections on Monday compared to Saturday,
suggesting that this corridor is significantly used by weekday
commuters and visitors to the Cayuga Professional Center and
Cayuga Medical Center. Other key observed user groups
included exercise bicyclists and exercise joggers.
Screenshots for the critical weekday scenario are presented below illustrating areas of highest use.
Exhibit 4-1: Intersection 1 Weekday Data
Photograph 4-1: Typical Camera
2071.001.001/04.2020 -34 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
Exhibit 4-2: Intersection 2 Weekday Data
Exhibit 4-3: Intersection 3 Weekday Data
2071.001.001/04.2020 -35 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
The findings from the camera data indicate the following additional considerations for
the development of alternatives and design concepts:
·Significant crossing to/from bus stop at Cayuga Professional Center driveway;
consider mid-block cross walk in this location
·Significant crossings at the unsignalized Bundy Road location; recommend a new
cross walk(s) in this location
·Pedestrian use on the east side of Trumansburg Road is heavier than the west side;
prioritize sidewalk on the east side of roadway
2071.001.001/04.2020 -36 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
5.0 PRELIMINARY DESIGN
The study included the evaluation of multiple alternatives, including a Null Alternative and two primary
build alternatives. Descriptions of these alternatives, and their associated impacts and benefits are
presented below.
5.1.Design Criteria
The basis of design for the build alternatives is based on the following engineering
standards:
Table 5-1: Design Standards
Project Type NYSDOT Design Guidance
Roadway NYSDOT Highway Design Manual
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities NYSDOT Highway Design Manual Chapters 17 & 18
Crosswalks NYSDOT Pedestrian Safety Action Plan
Shared-Use Path 2012 AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle
Facilities
2071.001.001/04.2020 -37 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
Table 5-2: Critical Design Elements for Trumansburg Road
Route No. & Name:
Trumansburg
Road (NYS Route
96)
Functional Classification:Urban Minor Arterial
Project Type:Improvements Design Classification:Urban Arterial (Non- NHS)
% Trucks:4.3%Terrain:Rolling
AADT (2019):8286 Truck Access/Qualifying
Hwy.
Access-Yes;
Qualifying-No
Element Standard Existing Condition Proposed Condition
1 Design Speed 40 mph Min.; 45 mph Max.
HDM Section 2.7.2.3
45 mph posted
50mph (85 Percentile)
45 mph (Posted)
50 mph (Design Speed)
2 Lane Width
11 ft. minimum; 12 ft.
Desirable
HDM Section 2.7.2.3
12’-0”12’-0”
3 Bicycle Lane 5 ft. Min; 6-7 ft. Desirable
HDM Section 2.7.2.3 6 ft. Shoulder 6 ft. Shoulder/Bicycle
Lane
4 Turning Lane 11 ft. Min.; 12 Desirable
HDM Section 2.7.2.3 12 ft.12 ft.
5 Shoulder Width
Curb: 5 ft. Min. 6 ft. desirable
with cyclists
Uncurbed: 6 ft.
HDM Section 2.7.2.3
6 ft.6 ft.
6 Superelevation
4% Max.
HDM Section 2.7.2.3 E
Exhibit 2-1b
Normal Crown Normal Crown
7
Stopping Sight
Distance
(Horizontal)
387 ft. Min. (50 mph)
HDM Section 2.7.2.3 F, Exhibit
2-5
Varies Match Existing
8 Maximum Grade
6%
HDM Section 2.7.2.3 G, Exhibit
2-4a
6% max.6% max
9 Cross Slope 1.5% Min. to 2.5% Max.
HDM Section 2.7.2.3 H 2%2%
10 Vertical Clearance
14 ft. Minimum
14’-6” Desirable
HDM Section 2.7.2.3 I, BM
Section 2.3, Table 2-2
No Vertical Obstruction No Vertical Obstruction
2071.001.001/04.2020 -38 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
Table 5-3: Sidewalk Design Criteria
Element
Preferred
(HDM Ch. 17
&18)
Allowable Proposed Remarks
1 Sidewalk Width 5 ft.4 ft. (min)5 ft.5 ft. min. typical
2 Buffer Zone (edge of
sidewalk to curb)8 ft.
2 ft. – 6 ft.
(recommended)
HDM 18.6.6
Exhibit 18-8
(varies) 1 ft.
to 5 ft.
4 ft. min.typical for
residential development
however may not be
achievable for constrained
developed areas. 1 ft. min.
proposed to allow for sign
posts and street
hardware.
HDM 3.2.11.1
3 Sidewalk Cross-slope 1.5%2.0%1.5%In compliance with ADA
guidelines.
4 Walking surfaces
(Profile)1:22 (4.5%)1:20 (5%)1:22 (4.5%)
All sidewalk surfaces will
be constructed to a grade
no greater than 4.5%
except in the areas were
the sidewalks matches a
respective highway profile
greater than 4.5% (6%
Along Trumansburg Road).
5
Curb Ramps
-Cross-slope
-Running
slope
-Flared side
slope
-Turning
space
-Clear space
1.5%
7.5%
9.5%
48”x48” (min)
48”x48” (min)
2.0%
8.0%
10.0%
48”x48” (min)
48”x48” (min)
1.5%
7.5%
9.5%
48”x48”
(min)
48”x48”
(min)
In compliance with ADA
guidelines and Values
match NYSDOT Critical
Elements for the design,
layout, and acceptance of
Pedestrian Facilities
2071.001.001/04.2020 -39 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
5.2.Design Alternatives
Design alternatives are presented on the Alternatives Map,Figure 2 of Appendix A. Descriptions of the
design alternatives are presented in the following sections.
5.2.1.Alternative 1 – Null
Alternative 1 is the null, or do nothing alternative.
Based on the feedback that was received during the Stakeholder Group meetings, the results of
the online survey and comments made during the public informational meeting, the null
alternative did not meet any of the goals and objectives of the study nor did it satisfy the
objectives of the Town or the public at large.
5.2.2.Alternative 2 – Sidewalk Connection East Side
In this alternative, a new 5 ft. wide sidewalk connection would be constructed from the Cayuga
Professional Center Drive near Hayts Road to the existing sidewalk at the City of Ithaca boundary
line. The concrete sidewalk would run along the east side of Trumansburg Road only.
This alternative meets the goals and objectives of the project, allowing for a pedestrian
connection between the key pedestrian generator areas as identified in Section 3.1,Existing
Land Usage. This sidewalk route increases safety by creating a continuous connection to the City
of Ithaca sidewalk system.
5.2.3.Alternative 3 – Sidewalk Connection West Side & Mid-Block Crossing
Alternative 3 includes the improvements of Alternative 2 along with additional improvements to
the west side of Trumansburg Rd. For this alternative, in addition the new sidewalk on the east
side of the roadway, a new 5 ft. wide sidewalk connection will be installed from Hayts Road to
Bundy Road on the west side of Trumansburg Road. A mid-block crossing is also proposed at
Bundy Road, allowing pedestrians on the west to cross over to the connecting sidewalk on the
east side for connection south to the City.
This alternative provides a pedestrian connection between the key pedestrian generator areas
along the west side of Trumansburg Road. Public input (Appendix D) noted locations such as
the Northeast Pediatrics Center & Adolescent Medicine and the Overlook Apartments as
needing pedestrian infrastructure improvements. The proposed route ends at Bundy Road to
avoid the restrictive barriers to construction south of Bundy Road (i.e., mature trees, significant
cut and existing culvert). Consideration of these barriers indicate that the benefits of a sidewalk
on the west side do not outweigh the costs/constraints for this section of roadway, where
pedestrian access points are limited.
2071.001.001/04.2020 -40 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
5.2.4.Additional Alternatives
The following additional alternatives were explored and discussed with the public and with
Town staff. These options are valuable to record, however the consensus, based on input from
the Town, is that these are not preferred alternatives and will not be further explored as part of
this study.
5.2.4.1 Multi-User Path Extension
This alternative would provide a new 8-ft or 10-ft wide multi-user asphalt trail along the
east side of Trumansburg Road in segments that allow for the wider typical section.
Multi-user paths allow for multiple user types such as bicyclist to travel on a safe path
between the key pedestrian and bicyclists generation areas. It also improves the
connection to the Black Diamond Trail. The wider section required for this trail results in
significantly more restrictive areas and numerous issues such as impacting driveway
slopes for residents. These issues would result in only short sections of a multi-user
path, limiting the usefulness of this option. Additionally, this might encourage cyclists to
ride on the pedestrian sidewalk sections. Due to these consideration this option will not
be further pursued at this time.
5.2.5.Additional Recommendations
The following recommendations have come out of the findings of the project study analysis.
They are noted here for further consideration by the Town of Ithaca for future consideration.
These elements are beyond the scope of this project and are not included in the detailed
evaluation.
5.2.5.1 Turn Lane Improvements
Accident data and traffic LOS data indicates recommended improvements at the
intersection of Trumansburg Road and Harris B Dates Drive. The most common
accidents involve collisions caused by southbound traffic turning left on to Harris B
Dates Drive. To decrease accidents and improve safety, a left turn lane addition is
recommended. Trumansburg Road would be widened on either side of the intersection.
This widening on the north side will add a lane for the left hand turn. Widening on the
south side will allow for a straight alignment lane for thru traffic passing through the
intersection while maintaining the right turn lane.
2071.001.001/04.2020 -41 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
5.2.5.2 Speed Limit Reduction
Accident data and public input have indicated that a safety benefit would be realized
from lowering the current 45mph speed limit though the project area. Currently the
speed is reduced to 30mph while entering the City of Ithaca. Based on the analysis
presented within this study, as well as from comments received via public feedback, it is
recommended that the Town request a Speed Limit Study from the NYSDOT for this
corridor.
Although this study recommends the Town petition the NYSDOT for a speed limit study,
it should be noted that the alternatives above were developed based on the existing
posted speed of 45mph.
5.2.5.3 Black Diamond Trail Connection: Option 1
Based on results of the public input, there is a strong desire for increased connectivity
from Trumansburg Rd. to the Black Diamond Trail. Options for connecting the trail are
presented on Figure 2 of Appendix A. The first option would provide a multi-modal trail
starting from Trumansburg Road at Harris B Dates Drive, turning left to follow the
existing roadway, then extending along an existing maintenance access path.
A connection to the Black Diamond trail will transverse a significant grade change; this
option provides a longer winding path that can meet the ADA design standard of 4.5%
running longitudinal slope. Furthermore, the existing dirt/stone road will limit the
amount of clearing and grubbing required. As previously noted, the hospital has
submitted a grant application in the 2018 and 2019 CFA round for construction of this
trail connection.
5.2.5.4 Black Diamond Trail Connection: Option 2
The second connection option would provide a new 10’ wide multi-modal trail within
the overhead utility corridor that is located adjacent to the Museum of the Earth
(Option 2 on Figure 2 of Appendix A), connecting the new sidewalk installation along
Trumansburg Road to the existing Black Diamond Trail.
This connection route is steeper, at about a 10% longitudinal slope, which does not
meet the recommended 4.5% design running trail slope per ADA standards (see design
criteria table. The benefits of this option include a short/direct route, which resides
within an already cleared area.
2071.001.001/04.2020 -42 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
5.2.5.5 Black Diamond Trail Connection – Option 3
Based on feedback from public workshops, there is a desire for residents in the southern
section of the corridor for a future connection to Black Diamond Trail towards the south
end of the project area (i.e. near Williams Glen or Bundy Rd). This potential alternative
connection would provide a new 10’ wide multi-modal trail through vacant private
property. This path has not been presented as an option on Figure 2 of Appendix A as it
would require land acquisition or easements and would require a long meandering
pathway due to steep topography.
2071.001.001/04.2020 -43 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
6.0 DETAILED EVALUATION
With consensus from the Town of Ithaca, Build Alternatives 2 and 3 were evaluated in further detail,
including development of Concept Plans and cost estimates. The Plan Sheets for both build alternatives
are presented on the Drawings PL-1 to PL-3 in Appendix B. Design elements for these alternatives are
described in the following sections.
6.1.Alternative 2 – Sidewalk Connection East Side
In this alternative, a new sidewalk connection would be constructed from the Cayuga
Professional Center Drive near Hayts Road to the existing sidewalk at the City of Ithaca boundary
line. The concrete sidewalk would run along the east side of Trumansburg Road only.
The sidewalk would be 5’-0” wide per NYSDOT design standards. Four typical sidewalk section
concepts were developed per the design criteria (refer Section 5.1). Proposed typical sections
are shown on Figure 3 and Figure 4 of Appendix A. Each typical section is representative of a
roadway/sidewalk segment along the proposed route. The concepts also show existing
ditches/gutters that will need to be replaced with segments of storm sewer.
This route does have some difficulties to overcome due to width restrictions and other design
constraints. Three key restrictive areas, as identified on Figure 2 of Appendix A, will require
retaining wall installations and/or steep embankment work to increase the section width for the
5’ wide sidewalk. Modifications to proposed cross-sections to infringe on the existing shoulder
are not preferred per NYSDOT standards (HDM Section 2.7.2.3) and to maintain desired bicycle
usage widths.
The restrictive section at the William Brook culvert will likely require a retaining wall installation,
as well as steep embankment installations. For estimating purposes, a 5-ft tall fill type retaining
wall is assumed to be installed along 100-LF of the proposed sidewalk above the culvert,
towards the top of the embankment slope. Additionally, steep embankment fill is required for
an approximately 100-LF section of sidewalk south of the Williams Brook culvert. Due to the
steep slopes and the retaining wall, it is assumed that 200-LF of 42-inch wooden pedestrian
railing is required to meet safety standards.
The Environmental Assessment in Section 3.2 above shows some design considerations will be
needed regarding historic resources and two creek crossings, however, these can be
incorporated into a successful final design.
2071.001.001/04.2020 -44 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
This alternative is estimated to cost $3.1M. A breakdown of the cost estimate is presented in
Section 6.3. Refer to Plans (P-1 to P-3) for the approximate location of utilities that may need to
be relocated based on the concept. The opinion of probable cost is based on the following
design assumptions:
·100-LF of 5-ft retaining wall and 100-LF embankment fill at the Williams Brook culvert
·Construction small bridge/culvert over swale at station 39+50
·Relocation of 15 power poles
·Relocation of existing guiderails in two locations
·Relocation of 5 hydrants
·Relocation of 5 existing catch basins
·Approximately 17 catch basins and 2,880 linear feet of storm sewer
·Planting to replace 900 LF of shrubs/hedge along residential properties, 42 deciduous
trees and 8 evergreen trees
6.2.Alternative 3 – Sidewalk Connection West & Mid-Block Crossing
This alternative includes the improvements described for Alternative 2 (sidewalk on the east
side) in addition to a sidewalk to be constructed on the west side of Trumansburg Rd. The
sidewalk would be 5’-0” wide with the proposed section concept as shown on cross section #2A
on Figure 4 of Appendix A,Proposed Roadway Conditions. At Bundy Road, a crosswalk is
recommended that connects to the east side of Trumansburg Road, connecting to Alternative 2
above. The concepts also show existing ditches/gutters that will need to be replaced with
stretches of storm sewer.
The Environmental Assessment in Section 3.2 above shows limited environmental factors
affecting the final design on the west side of Trumansburg Rd.
This alternative is estimated to cost $5.5M. A breakdown of the cost estimate is presented in
Section 6.3. Refer to Plans (P-1 to P-3) for the approximate location of utilities that may need to
be relocated based on the concept. The opinion of probable cost is based on the assumptions
for Alternative 2 above, as well as the following additional design assumptions for
improvements on the west side of the roadway:
·Relocation of up to 11 power poles
·Relocation of existing guiderail in one location
·Relocation of 1 hydrant
·Relocation of up to 2 existing catch basins
·Approximately 22 catch basins and 4,300 linear feet of storm sewer
·Plantings to replace 250LF of shrubs/hedge along residential properties, 15 deciduous
trees and 3 evergreen trees
2071.001.001/04.2020 -45 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
6.3.Cost Summary
The below table shows a breakdown of the probable cost of the proposed alternatives. The
costs include construction fees, engineering design fees, permitting costs, construction
management fees and a 20% contingency.
Additionally, the estimated costs associated with the right of way (ROW) process and land
compensation is shown. The ROW process for a federally funded transportation project includes
two phases, which are both included in the estimate below. The first being the Incidental Phase,
which includes real property title research and certification, interviews and appraisals, and
which is progressed during the preliminary engineering phase. Followed by the Acquisition
Phase, which includes negotiations with impacted property owners, transfer of real property
rights and right of way clearance. The estimated acquisition compensation cost based is also
included in this value.
Table 6-1: Probably Cost Summary
6.4.Additional Design Concepts
6.4.1.New Cross-walks
New cross-walks are proposed at the intersection of Bundy Road, as shown on PL-3.
These cross-walks are recommended for both build Alternatives 2 and 3, allowing
pedestrians to safely cross from west to east, connecting to the proposed new sidewalk
on the east side of Trumansburg Road continuing south to the City limit.
6.4.2.Public Transit
Review of pedestrian infrastructure improvements has led to an evaluation of potential
improvements to the Tompkins Consolidated Area Transit (TCAT) infrastructure along
Trumansburg Road. In addition to observations from the pedestrian traffic analysis,
Alternative Construction
Cost (2019)
20%
Contingency
3%
Inflation
to 2020
Design and
Construction
Engineering
(16 %)
ROW Process
and
Acquisition
Compensation
Total Cost
Alternative 2 –
Sidewalk
Connection East
$2,025,000 $405,000 $73,000 $400,000 $225,000 $3,128,000
Alternative 3 –
Sidewalk
Connection East
& West
$3,639,000 $737,000 $121,000 $719,000 $325,000 $5,541,000
2071.001.001/04.2020 -46 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
input from the public and from TCAT representatives provided support to identify key
locations for improvements. Based on the review of pedestrian movements within the
corridor, it is recommended that the existing bus stops remain and no new bus stops are
proposed. Proposed new bus shelter locations are recommended at the Cayuga
Medical Center (southbound) and Candlewyck Apartments (southbound) as shown on
the Alternatives Map,Figure 2 of Appendix A. Other potential locations include the
Cayuga Professional Center (northbound) and Bundy Rd. (northbound). The diagram
below was provided by TCAT and demonstrates bus stop usage in support of the
proposed bus shelter locations.
The following guidelines are recommended for new bus shelters:
·Incorporate full bus pull-off lanes to prevent buses from stopping in lane
·Provide concrete pad
·Safety lighting and seating
Figure 6-1: 2018 TCAT Ridership Boarding Locations
6.4.3.Signage
The cost of street signage relocation is included in the opinion of probable cost
developed for this study. Signage will also be required for the proposed new mid-block
crossing. Additional signage may be considered as part of the project, such as bicycle in
roadway/shoulder signage and wayfinding signage, particularly for potential future
connections to Black Diamond Trail.
2071.001.001/04.2020 -47 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
6.4.4.Environment and Natural Resources
The findings of the Environmental Assessment identified the importance of stormwater
management as highlighted by numerous environmental indicators in Section 3.2.
Stormwater conveyance has been considered in the concepts presented on PL-1 to -4;
the concepts aim to retain existing grassed/vegetated swales for the treatment of
stormwater prior to entering the closed drainage system. Where feasible, the design will
incorporate overland flow to grass/lawn areas in lieu of traditional curb/ closed drainage
systems. During detailed design, particular attention should be given to modifications
required to alleviate any existing flooding, and to protect surface waters from pollutants
typical within runoff from roadways. Consideration of potential green infrastructure
solutions to reduce runoff to local waterways may also be considered as part of the
design process.
6.4.5.Lighting
There are cobra head street lights at major intersections within the corridor (Hayts
Road, Bundy Road and Hopkins Place). There are additional cobra lights (3 no.) located
on power poles on the west side of Trumansburg Road between Hayts Road and the
entrance to the Museum of the Earth, as well as at the Fire Station driveway.
‘Pedestrian level’ lighting exists along the property at the Candlewyck Apartments. Refer
to Plans (P-1 to P-3) for the approximate location of existing lighting.
There are no cobra lights south of Candlewyck Apartments to Hopkins Place and south
of Hopkins Place to the City limits. Additional cobra lighting may be considered in this
area for pedestrian safety. Additional cobra lighting may be considered south of the Fire
Station to Bundy Road. Additional ‘street level’ lighting is recommended at proposed
new bus shelters.
6.4.6.Right-of-Way Acquisitions
B&L reviewed NYSDOT right-of-way (ROW) information based on available survey data
from road improvement design drawings dating from 1906 to 1967. Based on the 1906
drawings, the ROW appears to be approximately 50’ wide (i.e. 25’ from centerline on
either side) at Hayts Road, widening to approximately 60’ at Bundy Road (i.e. 25’ and 35’
from centerline on the east and west, respectively), and then narrowing back to 50’
beyond Bundy Road. ROW appears to narrow to 40’ (i.e., 20’ from centerline) near the
City Line. ROW information from 1925 drawings is similar, with the addition of ROW
near the culvert at Hopkins Place, where it widens from 50’ to between 80’ to 125’ at
the culvert. Based on the limited ROW information shown on the remaining drawings,
no substantial changes to ROW are observed from 1925 to 1967.
2071.001.001/04.2020 -48 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
Tax map parcel data was used to develop the concept plans, as presented in
Appendix B. It should be noted that the ROW boundary estimated based on the parcel
data differs from what was estimated based on NYSDOT historical survey/drawings. The
tax maps show a ROW that is significantly wider, approximately 70’ at Hayts Rd,
widening to approximately 80’ at Bundy Rd and narrowing again to 50’ at the City Line.
Based on the proposed cross sections presented on Figures 3 and 4 in Appendix A,
cross-sections #1, #2 and #4 require a minimum width of 25’ from centerline, and a
preferred width up to 30’ from centerline. Cross-section #3 (where there are existing
vegetated swales), requires a minimum width of 35’ from centerline. Boundary survey
will be required as part of the design phase to confirm ownership and assess
acquisition/easement needs.
As described in Section 6.4.4, a priority was placed on maintaining existing roadside
grassed/vegetated swales, which offer treatment for stormwater runoff prior to
entering the stormwater drainage system. In areas with large open lawns, such as at the
Museum of Earth / Vegan Epicure and Candlewyck Apartments, retention of existing
swales, as well as existing rows of mature trees (at Vegan Epicure) was prioritized over
maintaining the new sidewalk within the existing right-of-way. This will require
easements and/or acquisitions in these areas, which is considered preferable where
space allows. The location of the potential easements/acquisitions that would be
required to address the extended width of cross-section #3 is shown on Sheets PL-1 to
PL-3 in Appendix B.
6.4.7.Conceptual Landscaping
The design concept includes replacement of disturbed mature trees and hedges/shrubs
along the route. Additional shade trees are also proposed, where appropriate, such as
along the Museum of Earth / Vegan Epicure property.
Based on visual observation by a Registered Landscape Architect, typical existing trees
to be impacted along the corridor include Locust, Maple, Elm and Oak; a few locations
of Northern Catalpa were also observed. These deciduous types would be replaced with
similar 2-3 inch caliper ball and burlap replacement trees. Existing evergreens observed
include Norway, Spruce, White Pine and Eastern Red Cedar. These varieties would also
be replaced with similar 10-12’ replacement trees. All proposed deciduous and
evergreen plantings would be specified to be ‘moderate’ salt tolerance.
Typical existing deciduous hedges to be impacted along the corridor include Beech and
Privet. Existing ‘naturalized’ areas were also observed, which would be improved with a
variety of plantings, such as Serviceberries, Maple, Oak, Viburnum, Choke Berry, etc.
Existing invasive, such as Black Locust would be replaced with an alternative native
2071.001.001/04.2020 -49 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
hedge option, such as Willow biomass, at approximately 6-8’ spacing depending on
specified size and container.
The approximate locations of mature trees and hedges that may be impacted by the
proposed sidewalk are shown on P-1 to P-3. Based on site observation, it is anticipated
that the following landscaping will need to be replaced: +
·500LF of deciduous hedge at the hospital
·540LF of shrubs/hedge/naturalization along residential properties
·42 deciduous trees
·11 evergreen trees
·115LF of evergreen hedge
In addition to the above assumed replacements, up to 15 new shade trees (e.g., Elm,
Oak or Maple) are recommended along the Museum of the Earth / Vegan Epicure
property boundary to improve aesthetic and increase shade in this stretch of sidewalk.
2071.001.001/04.2020 -50 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
7.0 POTENTIAL PERMITS AND COORDINATION
The potential permits, coordination and certifications that are anticipated for project construction
include:
Permits
·State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) General Permit
·Highway Work Permit from NYS Department of Transportation (NYSDOT)
Coordination
·City of Ithaca
·Town of Ithaca
·TCAT
·NYS Office of Parks Recreation & Historic Preservation (OPRHP)
·Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
·New York State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO)
·US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
·NYS Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC)
2071.001.001/04.2020 -51 -Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.
8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
The overall corridor study recommendation is to pursue the proposed build alternatives to
accommodate the safe movement of pedestrians within this busy corridor.
The null or no build option is eliminated as it does not meet the objectives and goals of the project.
The proposed Alternative 2, sidewalk on the east side of Trumansburg Road, is the highest priority,
meeting the primary goals and objectives of the project while minimizing cost.
The proposed Alternative 3, sidewalks on both sides of the roadway, will improve safety for those
travelling to/from facilities on the west side of the corridor but is of second priority due to lower
density/usage, and is recommended for consideration as budgets / funding opportunities arise.
The additional recommendations, as presented in Sections 5.2.5 and 6.4, such as modifications to
signage, lighting and proposed new cross-walks may be further developed during the design stage of the
sidewalk project, or undertaken as parallel initiatives. Recommendations for lane modifications at Harris
B. Dates Dr. and potential speed reductions should also be considered by the Town and NYSDOT as
future initiatives to improve pedestrian safety within the corridor.
APPENDIX A
Figures
APPENDIX B
Concept Plans
APPENDIX C
Public Workshop Information Materials
APPENDIX D
Survey Response Summary and Public Comment Sheets
APPENDIX E
Existing Conditions
APPENDIX F
Traffic Data and Figures
APPENDIX G
Pedestrian Generator Checklist
www.bartonandloguidice.com
APPENDIX A
Figures
Trumansburg Road/NYS Route 96 Pedestrian Corridor Study
FIGURE 1: EXISTING ROADWAY CONDITIONS
Vegetated SwaleVegetated Swale#1 Least Restrictive - Least Restrictive -
LawnLawn #5
Vegetated / Grass Vegetated / Grass
SwaleSwale
#3
Restrictive - Steep Restrictive - Steep
slopeslope
#4#2 Roadside GutterRoadside Gutter
LEGENDSTREETSEGMENT 00.150.30.450.60.07Miles
¯HaytsHaytsHarris b. Harris b. DatesDatesKey MapKey Map CandlewykCandlewykBundyBundyHopkinsHopkinsTrumansburg Road/Route 96Trumansburg Road/Route 96
W HillW Hill#4
#5
#3#2#1
Sidewalk Options
Sidewalk Options - East
Sidewalk Options - West
TCAT Bus Stops
Proposed Bus Shelter
Existing Stop
Restrictive Areas - Guide Railing
Crosswalk Options
Multi-User Path Option
Trail Connection Options
Municipal Boundary
Existing Gutter
Project Segment Limits
Existing Guiderails
Existing Culverts
Existing Crosswalks
Existing Sidewalk
Roads
Streams
50 ft Contours
Cayuga_Lake
Parcels
ROW
Building Footprints
Legend
CAYUGA LAKE
TOWN OF ITHACACITY OF ITHACA
Trumansburg Road/Route 96 Pedestrian Study
Figure 2: Alternatives Map
BD TRAIL CONNECTION
OPTION 1
NORTHEAST PEDIATRICS CENTER &
ADOLESCENT MEDICINE
CAYUGA PROFESSIONAL CENTER
VEGAN EPICURE
BD TRAIL CONNECTION
OPTION 1
CAYUGA MEDICAL CENTER
OVERLOOK APARTMENTS
BUTTERMILK FALLS PEDIATRICS
NYSEG SUBSTATION
BD TRAIL CONNECTION
OPTION 21
CORNELL PROPERTY
MUSEUM OF THE EARTH
CONIFER VILLAGE AT CAYUGA MEADOWS
SIDEWALK ALTERNATIVE 2 - EAST
2
1
FIRE STATION
APPROVED 106 LOT SUBDIVISION
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES
Options Segment ID
CANDLEWYCK APARTMENTS
3
SIDEWALK ALTERNATIVE 3 - WEST
CAYUGA RIDGE EXTENDED CARE
MEDICAL OFFICE
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCESBLACK DI
AMOND TRAI
LITHACA SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH
State Park Property
4 BLACK DI
AMOND TRAI
LEXISTING CULVERT
BROOKDALE ITHACA
Private Vacant
Property
Cayuga Medical
Property
5
Trumansburg Road/NYS Route 96 Pedestrian Corridor Study
FIGURE 3: PROPOSED ROADWAY CONDITIONS
��������� ������ ����12’��������6’��������5’CL ���. 1’�������� 6’ ��������M��. �������� ������ (1’)���������� ���� 6” ���� ������ ���������� �������� ������ ������������ ����
12’
��������
6’
��������
5’
CL ��������� �������� 6’ ��������6” ���� ���. 1’ ������ ������������ ����������
��������
������ ����
12’
��������
6’
��������
5’
CL
���. 1’��������� �������� 6’ ��������M��. �������� ������ (1’)
������ ��������
�������
����������
����
6” ���� ������ ������������ ����������
��������
typical sidewalk with typical sidewalk with guide rail - fill guide rail - fill #1
#1b typical sidewalk with typical sidewalk with guide railguide rail#1a typical sidewalk withtypical sidewalk with
guide rail - fill with existing culvert guide rail - fill with existing culvert
STATIONING - RIGHT (WEST)Start Stop Length (FT)Proposed Cross SectionHAYTS ROAD (STA. E 11+52)W. HILL DRIVE (STA. E. 20+69)917 #2AW. HILL DRIVE (STA. E. 21+50)BUNDY ROAD (STA. E. 55+15)3365 #2ATotal4282STATIONING - LEFT (EAST)Start Stop Length (FT)Cross SectionCAYUGA PROFESSIONAL CENTER (STA. E 13+63)HARRIS B DATES DR. (STA. E. 20+72)709 #4HARRIS B DATES DR. (STA. E. 21+66)MUSEUM OF THE EARTH ENTRANCE (STA. E. 25+29)363 #4MUSEUM OF THE EARTH ENTRANCE (STA. E. 25+92)GRAND LODGE NORTH ACCESS (STA. E. 28+65)273 #4GRAND LODGE NORTH ACCESS (STA. E. 28+65)1236 TRUMANSBURG RD. DRIVEWAY (STA. E 39+59)1094 #31236 TRUMANSBURG RD. DRIVEWAY (STA. E 39+59)SEVENTH DAY CHURCH (STA. E 48+60)901 #4SEVENTH DAY CHURCH (STA. E 48+60)BUNDY ROAD (STA. E 56+00)740 #2BUNDY ROAD (STA. E 56+00)SOUTH SIDE OF CANDLEWYCK APT. (STA. E 62+23)623 #3SOUTH SIDE OF CANDLEWYCK APT. (STA. E 62+23)1105 TRUMANSBURG RD. (STA. E 73+25)1102 #21105 TRUMANSBURG RD. (STA. E 73+25)NORTH OF HOPKINS PLACE (STA. E 74+00)75 #1ANORTH OF HOPKINS PLACE (STA. E 74+00)1017 TRUMANSBURG RD (STA. E 76+75)275 #11017 TRUMANSBURG RD (STA. E 76+75)1009 TRUMANSBURG RD (STA. E 81+50)475 #1B1009 TRUMANSBURG RD (STA. E 81+50)CITY LIMIT (STA. E 83+33)183 #1ATotal6813
Trumansburg Road/NYS Route 96 Pedestrian Corridor Study
FIGURE 4: PROPOSED ROADWAY CONDITIONS (CONT.)
���� � ����������� �������������12’8’5’1-3’������ ����G���� ����� (������)��������6” ���� ���. �������� ������ (1’)������ ���������� ������������������������ 8’ ��������
������ ����
12’
��������������
6’
��. ����� ���������� ����
6’������
��������
5’
��2’ ���. �������� ������ 2’ ���. �������������� 6’ ��������
#3 #4
typical sidewalk with typical sidewalk with curb - fillcurb - fill#2 ������ ����12’G���� ����� (������)6’������������������ ���� 5’1-3’��6” ���� ���. �������� ������ (1’)������� �������� ������ �����/������������ ���������� ������������������������ 6’ ��������typical sidewalk with typical sidewalk with curb - cutcurb - cut
typical sidewalk with typical sidewalk with
landscape bufferlandscape buffer
������ ����
12’
��������
6’
���������
������
(������)
2-5’
����������
����
��������
5’
��2’ ���. �������� ������ �������� 6’ ��������
typical sidewalk with typical sidewalk with
existing swaleexisting swale
#2a
APPENDIX B
Concept Plans
APPENDIX C
Public Workshop Information Materials
7ЌЏЇϻЈЍϼЏЌЁ5ЉϻϾ1<65ЉЏЎϿ 3ϿϾϿЍЎЌЃϻЈ&ЉЌЌЃϾЉЌ6ЎЏϾГ
͙͘ ͘͝
̸EXISTING ROADWAY CONDITIONSPLACE A DOT BESIDE INTERSECTIONS THAT MAY SEEM DIFFICULT TO NAVIGATE AS A PEDESTRIAN.Map Sources: ESRI ArcGIS ProĔĜēĔċ ęčĆĈĆĎęĞĔċ ęčĆĈĆđĆĈ
Đ
Ď
Ć
Ē
Ĕ
ē
ĉ
ė
ĆĎ
đ
PLACE DOT HERE#1#1#1#1#2#2#3#3#4#4#5#5#7#7#8#8#9#9PLACE OTHER COMMENTS HEREOTHER COMMENTS:OTHER COMMENTS:#6#6PLACE DOT HERE#6#6PLACE DOT HERE#2#2PLACE DOT HERE#7#7PLACE DOT HERE#3#3PLACE DOT HERE#8#8PLACE DOT HERE#4#4PLACE DOT HERE#9#9PLACE DOT HERE#5#5INTERSECTIONINTERSECTIONCayuga LakeĜĊĘęčĎđđėĉĜĊĘęčĎđđėĉĈĆēĉđĊĜĞĈĐĉėĈĆēĉđĊĜĞĈĐĉėčĔĕĐĎēĘėĉčĔĕĐĎēĘėĉčĆĞęĘĉėčĆĞęĘĉėč Ć ė ė Ď Ę ć Ǥ ĉ Ć ę Ċ Ę ĉ ė
čĆėėĎĘ
ć
Ǥ
ĉ
Ć
ę
Ċ
Ę
ĉ
ė ćĚēĉĞėĉćĚēĉĞėĉ
7ЌЏЇϻЈЍϼЏЌЁ5ЉϻϾ1<65ЉЏЎϿ 3ϿϾϿЍЎЌЃϻЈ&ЉЌЌЃϾЉЌ6ЎЏϾГROADWAY DESTINATIONSPLEASE TELL US DESTINATIONS YOU VISIT THAT MAY BE DIFFICULT OR SEEM UNSAFE TO ACCESS.
͙͘ ͘͝
̸
ƭ ƭCONCERNS/COMMENTSCONCERNS/COMMENTSĜĊĘęčĎđđėĉĜĊĘęčĎđđėĉĈĆēĉđĊĜĞĈĐĉėĈĆēĉđĊĜĞĈĐĉėčĔĕĐĎēĘėĉčĔĕĐĎēĘėĉDESTINATIONSĆĞĚČĆĊĉĎĈĆđĊēęĊėĆĞĚČĆĊĉĎĈĆđĊēęĊėĆĞĚČĆĎĉČĊĆĞĚČĆĎĉČĊĝęĊēĉĊĉĆėĊĝęĊēĉĊĉĆėĊ ęčĆĈĆĊěĊēęčĆĞ ęčĆĈĆĊěĊēęčĆĞĉěĊēęĎĘęčĚėĈčĉěĊēęĎĘęčĚėĈčėĔĔĐĉĆđĊĊēĎĔėĎěĎēČėĔĔĐĉĆđĊĊēĎĔėĎěĎēČĔĜēĔċ ęčĆĈĆĎęĞĔċ ęčĆĈĆĚĘĊĚĒĔċęčĊĆėęčĚĘĊĚĒĔċęčĊĆėęčđĆĈ
Đ
Ď
Ć
Ē
Ĕ
ē
ĉ
ė
ĆĎ
đ
ĔėęčĜĊĘę ęčĆĈĆAllan H. Treman State Marine Park ĆēČĆė ĆēČĆėčĊĆęėĊčĊĆęėĊĚęęĊėĒĎđĐ ĆđđĘĚęęĊėĒĎđĐ ĆđđĘĊĉĎĆęėĎĈĘĊĉĎĆęėĎĈĘWRITE HEREWRITE HEREWRITE HEREWRITE HEREWRITE HEREWRITE HEREWRITE HEREWRITE HEREWRITE HEREWRITE HEREWRITE HEREĆĞĚČĆĆĐĊčĆĞęĘĉėčĆĞęĘĉėč Ć ė ė Ď Ę ć Ǥ ĉ Ć ę Ċ Ę ĉ ė
čĆėėĎĘ
ć
Ǥ
ĉ
Ć
ę
Ċ
Ę
ĉ
ė WRITE HEREWRITE HEREćĚēĉĞėĉćĚēĉĞėĉĆĞĚČĆĊĆĉĔĜĘĆĞĚČĆĊĆĉĔĜĘ
7ЌЏЇϻЈЍϼЏЌЁ5ЉϻϾ1<65ЉЏЎϿ 3ϿϾϿЍЎЌЃϻЈ&ЉЌЌЃϾЉЌ6ЎЏϾГ6RXUFH (VUL'LJLWDO*OREH*HR(\H(DUWKVWDU*HRJUDSKLFV&1(6$LUEXV'686'$86*6
̸ ̸̸̸͚͙͙͘͘͘͠ ̸ ζ η͘͝ ͙͘ DRAINAGE & TOPOGRAPHY MAPSection Elevation Source: Map My RideĔĜēĔċ ęčĆĈĆĎęĞĔċ ęčĆĈĆCayuga LakeėĚĒĆēĘćĚėČĔĆĉȀĔĚęĊ͡͞MUNICIPAL BOUNDARYWATERBODIESSTREAMS10’ CONTOURSNWI WETLANDSDEC 100 FT BUFFERCORRIDORROADWAYSStart: Hayts Rd927 ftǣơ641 ftȀ͡͞Elevation (ft)Grade Drop:286 ftNSHarris B. Dates Dr Exn.20 miBundy Rd.84 miHopkins Pl1.22 miƤȀWilliams Glen Rd1.43 miCulvert #1Culvert #250’ CONTOURS ĆĞęĘ ĆėėĎĘǤĆęĊĘĚēĉĞ ĔĕĐĎēĘĎđđĎĆ
Ē
Ę
đ
Ċ
ē
ėĔĔĐċĎĊđĉ͘͡͝855͘͟͞͞͝͝570͘Ǥ͚͡0.57Distance (mi)͘Ǥ͠͞1.151.430
7ЌЏЇϻЈЍϼЏЌЁ5ЉϻϾ1<65ЉЏЎϿ 3ϿϾϿЍЎЌЃϻЈ&ЉЌЌЃϾЉЌ6ЎЏϾГBENEFITS OF ACTIVE TRANSPORTATIONPLACE A STICKER NEXT TO THE ASPECT OF COMMUNITY SUSTAINABILITY THAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT TO YOU.HEALTH »More than 60% of US adults age 20 or older are overweight or obese. The percentage of young people who are overweight has tripled since 1980 (16% of people age 6-19 years). »Regular physical activity can help lead to weight loss, and reduce the risk of many serious diseases, such as high blood pressure, heart disease, arthritis, and depression.BENEFITS AT ANY AGE »Children who are physically active perform better academically and miss fewer days of school. » Ƥ Ǥ Ƥ a stronger heart, a positive mental outlook, and an increased ƤǦƤwill become increasingly important as our population ages in the coming years. » Ƥ ͙͠ǤENVIRONMENTAL »88% of all trips in the United States are made by car, often by an individual person. »Of all trips: 50% are under 3 miles. 28% are 1 mile or less. 72% of trips involving less than 1 mile are driven. »Bicycling and walking creates zero greenhouse gas emissions. »Half of the average person’s greenhouse gas emissions stem from transportation. »Motor vehicle emissions represent 31% of total carbon dioxide, 81% of carbon monoxide, and 49% of nitrogen oxides released in the U.S. »A short, four-mile round trip by bicycle keeps about 15 pounds of pollutants out of the air we breathe. »Vegetation will survive better if air pollution is reduced.SOCIAL »Cities that promote bicycling retain youth, attract young families, and increase social capital. »Increased transportation equity provides mobility for the 1/3 of the people in the U.S. who do not have cars, thereby increasing access to jobs, education, and health care. »Better bicycling conditions provide access to recreational and work destinations, schools, public transit, and local shops. »Walking and bicycling increases opportunities for social interaction and contributes to a sense of community. »The number of people bicycling can be a good indicator of a community’s livability - a factor that has a profound impact on attracting businesses, workers, and tourism. »Increased active transportation typically increases safety for motorists, bicyclists, and walkers. Example: In Portland, OR bike crashes went down by 50%.ECONOMIC »For every dollar earned, the average American household spends 18 cents on transportation, of which almost 17 cents is for costs associated with owning a car. »The average vehicular commuter spends $7500 per year on commuting expense. The average transit rider spends between $200 and $2600 on public transportation. The cost of operating a bicycle for a year is only $120. »Walking and cycling can save money that can be re-invested in the local economy. »On average, switching from driving to cycling saves $1.42/mile. »In Portland, OR, each $1 invested in active transportation ͆͠ ƤǤ »Every dollar invested in public transportation can generate $4 in economic returns.EnvironmentalSocialEconomicHealthCommunity SustainabilityPlace Sticker HerePlace Sticker HerePlace Sticker HerePlace Sticker Here ǡơǡǡ ǡ ƤǤTrumansburg Road/Route 96 is 8.6 miles long. :DONLQJMRJJLQJRUF\FOLQJWKLVGLVWDQFHFDQKDYHFRQVLGHUDEOHKHDOWKEHQHÀWV 956 calories or4.75 donuts1,448calories or 7.25 donuts349 calories or 1.75 donuts
7ЌЏЇϻЈЍϼЏЌЁ5ЉϻϾ1<65ЉЏЎϿ 3ϿϾϿЍЎЌЃϻЈ&ЉЌЌЃϾЉЌ6ЎЏϾГĊĞĆĕėĚĒĆēĘćĚėČĔĆĉȀĔĚęĊ͡͞#3INTERSECTION : ROUTE 96 near CAYUGA PROFESSIONAL CENTERTCAT BUS STOPPEDESTRIAN STANDING AREANUMBER OF PEDESTRIANS (on each path)TCAT BUS STOPPEDESTRIAN STANDING AREANUMBER OF PEDESTRIANS (on each path)TCAT BUS STOPPEDESTRIAN STANDING AREANUMBER OF PEDESTRIANS (on each path)4527%9%76%of pedestrians lived in the apartments south-west of the intersection of pedestrians required mobility assistance (walkers or canes)of pedestrians used TCAT stops adjacent to the intersectionABOUT THIS INTERSECTION89%of pedestrians used crosswalks where they were availablepedestrians used this intersection on Monday, May 6thROUTE 96 (TRUMANSBURG ROAD)ROUTE 96 (TRUMANSBURG ROAD)ROUTE 96 (TRUMANSBURG ROAD)COUNTY ROAD 138 (BUNDY ROAD)WEST HILL DRIVEHARRIS B DATES DRIVECAYUGA PROFESSIONAL CENTER DRIVEA key connector between the West Hill Apart-ments and the Cayuga Medical Center, this ƥ along this corridor. While the existing cross-walks are well-used, sidewalk gaps force pe-destrians (including mobility-assisted and Cayuga Medical patients) to walk along the shoulders of roads.128.550%58%of pedestrians used this intersection before 10AM, when sunlight is in southbound drivers’ eyesof pedestrians used TCAT stops adjacent to the intersectionThe average wait time, in minutes, for TCAT usersABOUT THIS INTERSECTIONof pedestrians were forced to cross this in-tersection without the aid of a crosswalkpedestrians used this intersection on Monday, May 6thLocated at the junction of two major thor-oughfares, this intersection receives moderate ƥ Ǥ -idents of the Brookdale Ithaca assisted living facility, as well as TCAT riders from nearby Candlewick Apartments. A lack of crosswalks and safe pedestrian gathering space forces these users to cross the street and wait for the bus in the shoulder of the road, a dangerous location.1650%25%75%of pedestrians who used this intersection visited the adjacent professional center of pedestrians crossed Trumansburg Road without the aid of a crosswalkof pedestrians used TCAT stops adjacent to the intersectionABOUT THIS INTERSECTION66%of pedestrians used the north-east shoulder to walk pedestrians used this intersection on Monday, May 6thLocated adjacent to a large professional cen-ter, this intersection is primarily used by Tomp-kins Consolidated Area Transit (TCAT) bus riders and visitors to the professional center. Without a crosswalk or designated waiting area, pedestrians are forced to use the shoul-ders of the road to walk and stand. A lack of night lighting also makes this intersection par-ticularly dangerous for pedestrians. INTERSECTION : ROUTE 96, WEST HILL DRIVE, and HARRIS DATES DRIVEINTERSECTION : ROUTE 96 and BUNDY ROAD (COUNTY ROAD 138)To gather pedestrian movement data, time-lapse cameras were placed at key locations along the Routes 96 Corridor from May 5-12, 2019. The following information represents pedestrian counts, movement patterns, and gathering places for a 24-hour period on Monday, May 6, 2019, a warm, sunny spring day. Bicycle data was also collected; 13 bicy-clists used this corridor during this 24-hour time period. LEGENDLEGEND42%
7ЌЏЇϻЈЍϼЏЌЁ5ЉϻϾ1<65ЉЏЎϿ 3ϿϾϿЍЎЌЃϻЈ&ЉЌЌЃϾЉЌ6ЎЏϾГĊĞĆĕėĚĒĆēĘćĚėČĔĆĉȀĔĚęĊ͡͞#3INTERSECTION : ROUTE 96 near CAYUGA PROFESSIONAL CENTERTCAT BUS STOPPEDESTRIAN STANDING AREANUMBER OF PEDESTRIANS (on each path)TCAT BUS STOPPEDESTRIAN STANDING AREANUMBER OF PEDESTRIANS (on each path)TCAT BUS STOPPEDESTRIAN STANDING AREANUMBER OF PEDESTRIANS (on each path)1718%47%88%of pedestrians lived in the apartments south-west of the intersection of pedestrians were, or were with, young childrenof pedestrians were exercise walking or joggingABOUT THIS INTERSECTIONpedestrians used this intersection on Saturday, May 11ROUTE 96 (TRUMANSBURG ROAD)ROUTE 96 (TRUMANSBURG ROAD)ROUTE 96 (TRUMANSBURG ROAD)COUNTY ROAD 138 (BUNDY ROAD)WEST HILL DRIVEHARRIS B DATES DRIVECAYUGA PROFESSIONAL CENTER DRIVEThe pedestrian user group demographics shift slightly on the weekends at this intersection, as more families and exercise walkers or joggers pass through. The majority of pedestrian traf-Ƥ ǡǡ apartment complex.425%0%50%of pedestrians used this intersection before 10AM, when sunlight is in southbound drivers’ eyesof pedestrians crossed Route 96 at this intersectionof pedestrians accessed this intersection via Bundy RoadABOUT THIS INTERSECTIONpedestrians used this intersection on Saturday, May 11thǡ ƥ ǤA lack of crosswalks discourages pedestrian crossings, while narrow shoulders force pedestrians to walk dangerous633%83%0%of pedestrians who used this intersection visited the adjacent professional center of pedestrians who passed through this intersection were on a recreational jogof pedestrians used this intersection during dusk, with limited lightingABOUT THIS INTERSECTIONpedestrians used this intersection on Saturday, May 11thSince the majority of weekday pedestrian ƥ ǡ ǤINTERSECTION : ROUTE 96, WEST HILL DRIVE, and HARRIS DATES DRIVEINTERSECTION : ROUTE 96 and BUNDY ROAD (COUNTY ROAD 138)LEGENDLEGEND ǧĎĒĊĆĕĘĊĆĒĊėĆǡǦ ͡͞ ǡǡ Ǥ͚͙͘͟ ǤDate Represented:ǡ͙͙ǡ͚͙͘͡Timeframe:͚͜ǦWeather: Warm, sunny spring day
7ЌЏЇϻЈЍϼЏЌЁ5ЉϻϾ1<65ЉЏЎϿ 3ϿϾϿЍЎЌЃϻЈ&ЉЌЌЃϾЉЌ6ЎЏϾГ
̸ ̸ ͙͘ ͘͝
̸ROADWAY & CRASH INFORMATIONVEHICULAR - PEDESTRIAN CRASHVEHICULAR - PEDESTRIAN CRASHTRUMANSBURG ROAD/STATE ROUTE 96ěĊėĆČĊĆĎđĞėĆċċĎĈǣ8,865 (2015) ĚēĈęĎĔēĆđđĆĘĘǣėćĆēĎēĔėėęĊėĎĆđĊēČęčĔċĔėėĎĉĔėǣ ͙Ǥ͜ĒĎđĊĘĔĜēĔċ ęčĆĈĆĎęĞĔċ ęčĆĈĆCayuga LakeėĚĒĆēĘćĚėČĔĆĉȀĔĚęĊ͡͞ ĆĞęĘ ĆėėĎĘǤĆęĊĘĚēĉĞ ĔĕĐĎēĘĎđđĎĆ
Ē
Ę
đ
Ċ
ē
ėĔĔĐċĎĊđĉTOTAL CRASHESYEARS (2012-2016)132525.7 CRASHES PER YEAR5.3ROUTE 96NEW YORKSTATE3.5 ACCIDENTS per MILLION VEHICLE MILES1.5 X MORE THAN NYS AVERAGE YEARLY VEHICULAR ACCIDENTSACCORDING TO DATA FROM THE STATEWIDE ALIS DATA-BASE, THIS 1.6 MILE CORRIDOR OF ROUTE 96 HAS A SIGNIFI-CANTLY HIGHER AMOUNT OF CRASHES THAN THE AVERAGE NEW YORK STATE ROAD. 20142015201625 2530
7ЌЏЇϻЈЍϼЏЌЁ5ЉϻϾ1<65ЉЏЎϿ 3ϿϾϿЍЎЌЃϻЈ&ЉЌЌЃϾЉЌ6ЎЏϾГNEEDS & OPPORTUNITIES ASSESSMENTHAYTS ROAD INTERSECTIONBUNDY ROAD INTERSECTION ƭ
PLACE OTHER NEEDS/OPPORTUNITIES HEREOTHER NEEDS/OPPORTUNITIES:ĘĘĊĘĘĎēČęčĊĔėėĎĉĔėȀ ͡͞ǡ ǡǡ Ǥ ǡƤ ǡǤ Ǥ ǡ ǤƤ Ƥ Ǥ ǡ ǡ ǡ ǤĊĊĉĘƭĕĕĔėęĚēĎęĎĊĘ• The shoulder space on the west side of Route 96 varies from 4’ to 5’, and is used as a bikeway in Tompkins County. There is a need for a consistent shoulder of at least 5’ to provide adequate space for bicyclists.• There are many bus stop signs on Route 96 that abut a drainage swale. There is a need for pads and improved accommodations for those who use these stops for public transit.• Drive lanes vary in width, along with the shoulders. Where appropriate, drive lanes can be standardized and reduced to 11’ to accommodate larger shoulders for bicyclists and pedestrians.• ƥ ǡ Ǥ Ƥ Ǥ ƤǤ• ƥ Ǥƥ ǡ ƥ Ǥ• There is no lighting along Trumansburg Road, yet many users noted they walk in the afternoon, and the roadway is used for commuting. Lighting is needed to facilitate safe coordination between roadway users.• ƪ ͙͘ǯǦ͙͝ǯǡǡȀǤ• There are drainage swales placed in intervals on each side of the road. These include grass swales, vegetated swales, and gutters.• ǡ Ǥƪǡ Ǥ infrastructure is put in place, especially curbing, drainage considerations need to be made that allow water through.ĊČĊęĆęĊĉĜĆđĊ
ėĆĘĘĜĆđĊ
ĚęęĊėLEGENDĚđěĊėę
ĚĎĉĊėĆĎđĆėĐĊĉ ēęĊėĘĊĈęĎĔē ēęĊėĘĊĈęĎĔēĘĔċĔēĈĊėēĎĉĊĜĆđĐĚĘęĔĕĚēĉĞĉėĔďĊĈę
APPENDIX D
Survey Response Summary and Public Comment Sheets
56.47%48
27.06%23
9.41%8
7.06%6
Q1 Please tell us about how often you walk on Trumansburg Road/Route
96.
Answered: 85 Skipped: 1
TOTAL 85
Never
Monthly
Weekly
Daily
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Never
Monthly
Weekly
Daily
1 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
22.35%19
0.00%0
23.53%20
44.71%38
9.41%8
Q2 Please tell us what time of year you walk along Trumansburg
Road/Route 96.
Answered: 85 Skipped: 1
TOTAL 85
#OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE
1 seldom but anytime necessary 4/16/2019 8:12 PM
2 never 4/15/2019 2:10 PM
3 Rare occasions may 1 or 2x a year 4/10/2019 9:01 PM
4 Never because of the speed limit and how unsafe Route 96 is for any pedestrian traffic 4/10/2019 8:59 PM
5 Depends on when my car stops working & the bus isn't running 4/1/2019 1:28 PM
6 Varies - lunch break walks 2/8/2019 5:58 PM
7 The route is not safe currently I would if there was a safe option 1/25/2019 3:58 PM
8 I only walk when I visit a friend who lives along that road.1/25/2019 3:05 PM
Warm weather
only
Cold weather
only
All year
Never
Other (please
specify)
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Warm weather only
Cold weather only
All year
Never
Other (please specify)
2 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
Q3 Considering a typical week in the past year, how often have you
walked along Trumansburg Road/Route 96 for the following reasons:
Answered: 84 Skipped: 2
Travel to work
Travel to
church/relig...
Travel to
school
Travel to
shopping
3 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
Travel to
Cayuga Medic...
Travel to
event or soc...
Physical
exercise
Dog walking
Leisure (no
specific...
4 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
75.00%
42
1.79%
1
8.93%
5
5.36%
3
8.93%
5
56
92.59%
50
0.00%
0
1.85%
1
5.56%
3
0.00%
0
54
88.68%
47
0.00%
0
5.66%
3
3.77%
2
1.89%
1
53
79.25%
42
5.66%
3
3.77%
2
9.43%
5
1.89%
1
53
74.07%
40
16.67%
9
3.70%
2
5.56%
3
0.00%
0
54
69.64%
39
12.50%
7
8.93%
5
8.93%
5
0.00%
0
56
56.67%
34
10.00%
6
15.00%
9
15.00%
9
3.33%
2
60
74.07%
40
5.56%
3
7.41%
4
11.11%
6
1.85%
1
54
60.34%
35
15.52%
9
8.62%
5
12.07%
7
3.45%
2
58
87.50%
42
2.08%
1
0.00%
0
2.08%
1
8.33%
4
48
#OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE
1 I don't walk on 96 because there are no sidewalks.5/22/2019 1:55 PM
2 the road is too busy to walk, it's not safe.5/13/2019 7:41 PM
3 If my car is unavailable I occassionally walk downtown 5/5/2019 7:12 PM
4 Live on T-Burg Rd, but seldom walk because it is unsafe 4/16/2019 8:12 PM
5 This link could possibly increase pedestrian fatalities due to the narrow roads and the speed limit 4/10/2019 8:59 PM
6 Walk to get my car that was being repaired 2/20/2019 9:26 PM
7 did you know you couldn't answer, for example, "never" twice?1/25/2019 6:22 PM
8 I drive or take the bus when going to West Hill, but would walk if there was a safe option 1/25/2019 5:02 PM
9 Need better access from CMC to BDT 1/25/2019 4:54 PM
10 Again the road traffic and conditions are not safe currently 1/25/2019 3:58 PM
11 When I visit a friend who lives along that street.1/25/2019 3:05 PM
12 This section is not letting me choose more than one choice per column. I think these radio buttons
have been set up wrong?
1/25/2019 2:35 PM
13 I hope you'll ask about bicycling; I almost never walk, except for trail hiking 1/23/2019 3:12 PM
Never Seasonally Monthly Weekly Daily
Have not
walked in th...
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
NEVER SEASONALLY MONTHLY WEEKLY DAILY TOTAL
Travel to work
Travel to church/religious institution
Travel to school
Travel to shopping
Travel to Cayuga Medical Center
Travel to event or social destination
Physical exercise
Dog walking
Leisure (no specific destination)
Have not walked in the past year
5 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
47.89%34
22.54%16
16.90%12
54.93%39
1.41%1
4.23%3
Q4 Do you have locations along or near Trumansburg Road/Route
96 that you like to walk to? Please check all that apply.
Answered: 71 Skipped: 15
Cayuga Medical
Center
Northeast
Pediatrics &...
Cayuga
Professional...
Museum of the
Earth
Cayuga Ridge
Extended Care
Brookdale
Church/religiou
s institution
Ithaca
Dermatology
Public transit
Home/residence/
apartment
Candlewyck
Apartments
The Overlook
at West Hill
Hangar Theater
State Black
Diamond Trail
Cass Park
Cayuga Inlet
Other (please
specify)
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Cayuga Medical Center
Northeast Pediatrics & Adolescent Center
Cayuga Professional Center
Museum of the Earth
Cayuga Ridge Extended Care
Brookdale
6 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
1.41%1
11.27%8
29.58%21
28.17%20
1.41%1
7.04%5
32.39%23
66.20%47
67.61%48
46.48%33
15.49%11
Total Respondents: 71
#OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE
1 Indian Creek Farm 5/22/2019 2:13 PM
2 Cayuga Meadows Apartments 5/13/2019 7:41 PM
3 Downtown 5/1/2019 11:14 PM
4 into the city for work 4/16/2019 8:12 PM
5 none 4/15/2019 2:10 PM
6 usually never 4/10/2019 9:01 PM
7 No 4/10/2019 8:59 PM
8 Linderman Creek 4/1/2019 1:28 PM
9 I don't walk, I ride my bike 1/30/2019 3:52 AM
10 I use the waterfront trail to walk for exercise 1/25/2019 3:05 PM
11 Indian Creek Farm 1/25/2019 1:13 PM
Church/religious institution
Ithaca Dermatology
Public transit
Home/residence/apartment
Candlewyck Apartments
The Overlook at West Hill
Hangar Theater
State Black Diamond Trail
Cass Park
Cayuga Inlet
Other (please specify)
7 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
6.41%5
56.41%44
30.77%24
6.41%5
Q5 Where do you prefer to walk?
Answered: 78 Skipped: 8
TOTAL 78
#OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE
1 I prefer to walk on a sidewalk, of course, but there isn't one...5/22/2019 7:23 PM
2 no where on 96 because it is too dangerous 4/15/2019 2:10 PM
3 Safe areas such as park trails or inside the mall 4/10/2019 8:59 PM
4 bike path 1/30/2019 3:52 AM
5 on the Finger Lakes Trail 1/23/2019 3:12 PM
Road shoulder
Sidewalk
Off-road trail
Other (please
specify)
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Road shoulder
Sidewalk
Off-road trail
Other (please specify)
8 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
13.41%11
26.83%22
7.32%6
43.90%36
8.54%7
Q6 What time of day do you most frequently walk?
Answered: 82 Skipped: 4
TOTAL 82
Morning
Afternoon
Evening
Any time of
the day
Never
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Morning
Afternoon
Evening
Any time of the day
Never
9 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
40.00%32
32.50%26
15.00%12
22.50%18
47.50%38
7.50%6
Q7 Have you used the City sidewalk system to travel from Trumansburg
Road/Route 96 into or out of the City of Ithaca? Please check all that
apply.
Answered: 80 Skipped: 6
Total Respondents: 80
#OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE
1 Bundy Road 6/21/2019 1:59 AM
2 TOO DANGEROUS 4/15/2019 2:10 PM
3 never in 54 years too dangerous with drug houses on cliff street 4/13/2019 7:01 PM
4 West State St to Taughannock Blvd then West Buffalo 4/1/2019 1:28 PM
5 Bike path 1/30/2019 3:52 AM
6 Elm St, Floral Ave 1/25/2019 3:05 PM
Cliff Street
West Buffalo
Street
Hector Street
West Seneca
Street
Have not used
sidewalk sys...
Other (please
specify)
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Cliff Street
West Buffalo Street
Hector Street
West Seneca Street
Have not used sidewalk system to travel in or out of the City of Ithaca via Trumansburg Road/Route 96
Other (please specify)
10 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
82.14%69
17.86%15
Q8 Have you used the NYS Parks Black Diamond Trail?
Answered: 84 Skipped: 2
TOTAL 84
Yes
No
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
11 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
84.52%71
15.48%13
Q9 Would you find a connection between the NYS Parks Black Diamond
Trail and Trumansburg Road/Route 96 useful?
Answered: 84 Skipped: 2
TOTAL 84
Yes
No
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
12 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
66.27%55
24.10%20
9.64%8
0.00%0
Q10 Please tell us about how often you bicycle along Trumansburg
Road/Route 96.
Answered: 83 Skipped: 3
TOTAL 83
Never
Monthly
Weekly
Daily
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Never
Monthly
Weekly
Daily
13 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
32.93%27
0.00%0
7.32%6
50.00%41
9.76%8
Q11 Please tell us what time of year you bicycle along Trumansburg
Road/Route 96.
Answered: 82 Skipped: 4
TOTAL 82
#OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE
1 Don’t have a bike. It’s not safe.5/7/2019 9:07 PM
2 Would like to. Don’t own a bike at this time.5/7/2019 8:43 PM
3 Never because it's even more unsafe than walking 4/16/2019 8:12 PM
4 no biking in 45 years 4/13/2019 7:02 PM
5 If the county has excess funds use those funds that would serve all county residents not a
sidewalk that would need to be upkept with more funds. Plant trees
4/10/2019 9:03 PM
6 rare occasions I bike along the Inlet or Black Diamond 4/10/2019 9:02 PM
7 Far too dangerous and narrow.1/26/2019 12:46 AM
8 Safety Issues 1/25/2019 3:59 PM
Warm weather
only
Cold weather
only
All year
Never
Other (please
specify)
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Warm weather only
Cold weather only
All year
Never
Other (please specify)
14 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
Q12 Considering a typical week in the past year, how often have you
used TCAT (Routes 14, 14S, and/or 21) along Trumansburg Road/Route
96 for the following reasons:
Answered: 79 Skipped: 7
Travel to work
Travel to
church/relig...
Travel to
school
Travel to
shopping
15 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
62.96%
34
14.81%
8
9.26%
5
5.56%
3
7.41%
4
54
88.64%
39
2.27%
1
2.27%
1
6.82%
3
0.00%
0
44
81.40%
35
2.33%
1
6.98%
3
4.65%
2
4.65%
2
43
74.47%
35
2.13%
1
8.51%
4
12.77%
6
2.13%
1
47
73.33%
33
17.78%
8
6.67%
3
2.22%
1
0.00%
0
45
63.83%
30
19.15%
9
8.51%
4
8.51%
4
0.00%
0
47
85.42%
41
6.25%
3
0.00%
0
2.08%
1
6.25%
3
48
#OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE
1 my daughter who works at Cornell rides the bus daily and when she was not working eg going to
school, she rode the bus since it stops right in front of our home
4/15/2019 2:14 PM
2 sister uses daily from work to home 4/13/2019 7:07 PM
Never Seasonally Monthly Weekly Daily
Travel to
Cayuga Medic...
Travel to
event or soc...
Have not used
TCAT in the...
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
NEVER SEASONALLY MONTHLY WEEKLY DAILY TOTAL
Travel to work
Travel to church/religious institution
Travel to school
Travel to shopping
Travel to Cayuga Medical Center
Travel to event or social destination
Have not used TCAT in the past year
16 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
3 TCAT is a great connection for this proposed pedestrian corridor, building another structure should
not even be entertained. As soon as someone is brutally killed, maimed from usinf this sidewalk I
will introduce them to a great pool of attorneys to sue the town of Ithaca
4/10/2019 9:09 PM
4 Travel from airport after dropping rental car off to home 4/10/2019 5:48 PM
5 Occasionally use TCAT when vehicles are in shop 1/25/2019 4:00 PM
6 If the 21 didn’t have a large gap in the schedule, and if we could safely cross the road with our
children, we would ride it much more frequently!
1/25/2019 3:16 PM
7 Same issue with the radio buttons - I can't choose "Never" or "Seasonally" for more than one row.1/25/2019 2:36 PM
17 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
Q13 Please indicate your level of satisfaction using TCAT on
Trumansburg Road/Route 96. On a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 meaning not
satisfied to 5 meaning fully satisfied, rate the following potential factors
that could affect your ability and/or willingness to use public transit.
Answered: 61 Skipped: 25
Transit trip
length
Travel
flexibility ...
Proximity of
bus routes t...
Bus stop
infrastructure
18 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
6.90%
2
20.69%
6
27.59%
8
13.79%
4
31.03%
9
29
26.47%
9
11.76%
4
35.29%
12
2.94%
1
23.53%
8
34
9.38%
3
9.38%
3
18.75%
6
12.50%
4
50.00%
16
32
20.69%
6
10.34%
3
27.59%
8
17.24%
5
24.14%
7
29
1 2 3 4 5
Bus stop
signage
Travel
destinations...
Personal safety
Have not used
TCAT in the...
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
1 2 3 4 5 TOTAL
Transit trip length
Travel flexibility in regards to route schedules
Proximity of bus routes to residence
Bus stop infrastructure
19 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
6.67%
2
16.67%
5
40.00%
12
13.33%
4
23.33%
7
30
6.45%
2
3.23%
1
29.03%
9
38.71%
12
22.58%
7
31
9.09%
3
15.15%
5
15.15%
5
27.27%
9
33.33%
11
33
62.50%
20
3.13%
1
6.25%
2
0.00%
0
28.13%
9
32
#OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE
1 N/A 6/5/2019 1:24 PM
2 Rt 14 headed into town takes too long, but I appreciate the consistency of the route. 21 provides
better service to my house though (near Indian Creek farm).
5/25/2019 2:59 PM
3 I will leave this survey mostly up to my daughter who rides the bus daily. It stops in front of Cayuga
Ridge which is next to my home. I would however like to see pick up routes on Five Mile Drive and
13A as well as Dubois road
4/15/2019 2:14 PM
4 TCAT is fine 4/13/2019 7:07 PM
5 TCaT, lime bikes, uber, lyft and rideshare are all safe and reliable sources to bridge the gap
between city of Ithaca and Cayuga Medical Center
4/10/2019 9:09 PM
6 They should have an express route from highway 96 to downtown (21) and have the 14 bus pick
up at Cayuga Medical center etc.
4/10/2019 12:39 PM
7 same problem: can't do two or three "5".1/25/2019 6:30 PM
8 Need better connection to Ithaca college 1/25/2019 4:57 PM
9 Survey is not working properly. I can’t fill in more than one bubble with the same rating. Crossing
96 near the old stone heap to get the bus at Hopkins is very unsafe. Also, we need service to
Ithaca Beer for work, and there isn’t a single bus that goes down Floral ave to connect at 13. Other
destinations downtown are relatively easy.
1/25/2019 3:16 PM
Bus stop signage
Travel destinations where you want to go
Personal safety
Have not used TCAT in the past year
20 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
Q14 What do you consider primary barriers to walking on Trumansburg
Road/Route 96? On a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 meaning no barrier to 5
meaning significant barrier, rate the following potential barriers that could
affect your ability and/or willingness to walk.
Answered: 72 Skipped: 14
Travel time
Travel
flexibility
Shoulder width
inadequate
Lack of
continuous...
21 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
Lack of
sidewalk...
Lack of
seating and/...
Lack of
connectivity
Lack of trail
Lack of
lighting
22 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
Motor vehicle
speeds
Inadequate
pedestrian...
Personal safety
Topography
Drainage issues
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
23 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
20.83%
10
18.75%
9
22.92%
11
14.58%
7
22.92%
11
48
23.91%
11
28.26%
13
15.22%
7
15.22%
7
17.39%
8
46
6.12%
3
8.16%
4
12.24%
6
12.24%
6
61.22%
30
49
13.56%
8
3.39%
2
3.39%
2
15.25%
9
64.41%
38
59
10.87%
5
6.52%
3
32.61%
15
15.22%
7
34.78%
16
46
42.22%
19
20.00%
9
17.78%
8
2.22%
1
17.78%
8
45
12.00%
6
8.00%
4
26.00%
13
18.00%
9
36.00%
18
50
10.20%
5
18.37%
9
14.29%
7
20.41%
10
36.73%
18
49
10.64%
5
14.89%
7
23.40%
11
19.15%
9
31.91%
15
47
8.93%
5
3.57%
2
7.14%
4
25.00%
14
55.36%
31
56
4.26%
2
10.64%
5
29.79%
14
14.89%
7
40.43%
19
47
10.17%
6
6.78%
4
8.47%
5
22.03%
13
52.54%
31
59
21.28%
10
23.40%
11
27.66%
13
19.15%
9
8.51%
4
47
34.09%
15
29.55%
13
20.45%
9
4.55%
2
11.36%
5
44
#OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE
1 This road is not safe to walk on. In the last 4 months three deer and three racoons have been
killed as well as two woodchucks. This is not unusual. This morning there was a dead skunk.
There is road kill every week so no matter how many sidewalks or crossings you put in it is still not
safe. These animals can move faster than most humans. In the past 53+ years I have owned my
home on Trumansburg Road, it is amazing how much the traffic has increased and how FAST the
traffic goes. With this age of distracted drivers, it is even more dangerous than ever. Back in the
60s when I was having a problem with a school bus refusing to leave my son off at our front
driveway and then passing my home to deliver other children and the bus wanted to leave him at
the corner of Bundy and Tburg Road, I had a NYS trooper come up to count cars with me and
assess the safety of my son waking from Bundy to my home. He counted 60-70 cars per minute.
That was many yeras ago. He told me he would go directly to the bus depot and let them know
they would be dropping my son off at our home. Can you imagine how many cars per minute
happens on Tburg Road now?
4/15/2019 2:26 PM
2 Security - poor lighting and rare police patrols 4/13/2019 7:08 PM
3 Hear me and hear me well, if the Town of Ithaca planner has nothing better to do then to sit in his
office dreaming of a vision of additional sidewalks for the county well my goodness isn't there real
concerns that need to be address besides a sidewalk. Work on fixing problems that already exist
not creating more problems for the future. Pathetic
4/10/2019 9:30 PM
4 no barriors just not needed 2/8/2019 5:16 PM
5 Only allowed single choice. Bottom line is feel unsafe walking on road where no sidewalk even
with sidewalk it is a bit daunting having fast moving traffic
1/26/2019 3:33 PM
6 i would put 5 for lack of sidewalk, lack of trail, and motor speeds.1/25/2019 6:37 PM
7 Traffic- that's what I meant by personal safety 1/25/2019 5:07 PM
8 Survey does not allow response to each item 1/25/2019 4:59 PM
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5 TOTAL
Travel time
Travel flexibility
Shoulder width inadequate
Lack of continuous sidewalk
Lack of sidewalk maintenance
Lack of seating and/or rest points
Lack of connectivity
Lack of trail
Lack of lighting
Motor vehicle speeds
Inadequate pedestrian safety signage
Personal safety
Topography
Drainage issues
24 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
9 I want to put 5 for most questions but can’t due to malfunctioning bubbles. A man was hit & killed
in front of our house a few years ago. Lighting is a huge problem. He was in the road and wearing
all black at night, so the driver was not a fault. However the road is pitch black except porch lights
on personal properties. As a parent, I consider it completely unsafe for walking with my kids. There
is a private entrance to the black diamond trail from Hillcrest; I wish the town would purchase and
maintain it so we could use it. It is unkempt now and doesn’t really connect because of that. I
worry for the safety of every pedestrian walking on 96. Drivers are in a hurry and don’t want to stop
for anything. Traffic lights and a lower speed limit and sidewalks are desperately needed.
Sometimes we can’t get out of our driveway because traffic is so bad. In addition, if we are turning
left into our driveway and have to wait for oncoming cars to pass, we have to signal and slow down
super early so we don’t get rear ended. We sometimes have had to keep driving because of cars
behind us not slowing down at all, making it seem like they don’t see us stopped.
1/25/2019 3:36 PM
10 This survey is not working, you can not choose 5 for more than one issue.1/25/2019 3:17 PM
25 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
21.15%11
9.62%5
7.69%4
13.46%7
1.92%1
0.00%0
1.92%1
3.85%2
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q15 Are there particular intersections or road crossings along
Trumansburg Road/Route 96 at which you feel unsafe crossing the road?
Please indicate the intersection of most concern.
Answered: 52 Skipped: 34
Hayts Road
West Hill
Drive/Harris...
Bundy Road
Bundy Road
Hopkins Place
Bundy Road
Brookfield
Road/William...
Hopkins Place
Candlewyck
Drive
Brookfield
Road/William...
Hillcrest Drive
Hopkins Place
Brookfield
Road/William...
Other location
(please...
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Hayts Road
West Hill Drive/Harris B. Dates Drive
Bundy Road
Bundy Road
Hopkins Place
Bundy Road
Brookfield Road/Williams Glen Road
Hopkins Place
Candlewyck Drive
Brookfield Road/Williams Glen Road
26 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
7.69%4
0.00%0
1.92%1
30.77%16
TOTAL 52
#OTHER LOCATION (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE
1 NEP to CMC 6/10/2019 3:07 AM
2 None 5/28/2019 1:00 PM
3 all of it 5/22/2019 7:26 PM
4 ALL OF THEM. At West Hlll Drive, the crossing seems to work well. It does not and will not work
well any other place. Too many cars, too many distracted drivers, traffic too fast.
4/15/2019 2:26 PM
5 Yeap cross the road at your own risk, bicycle on the streets of Ithaca at your risk, risk factors are
the high number of elderly accidents in Ithaca, the increased number of inadequate drivers, the
increased number of people driving under the influence. Heck you don't have to walk, bus or bike
in Ithaca to feel unsafe even driving in your own vehicle is a risk in this town
4/10/2019 9:30 PM
6 not really 4/10/2019 9:04 PM
7 Woolf Lane 4/10/2019 12:43 PM
8 in the past, Ive always thought the entrance to the professional building be located across Hayts,
to create an intersecting area, and not snarl u[ people's decisions driving
3/15/2019 2:01 PM
9 NA 2/18/2019 11:41 PM
10 none don't walk 2/8/2019 8:38 PM
11 uphill 1/30/2019 3:54 AM
12 All of above 1/26/2019 3:33 PM
13 I don't think those are big obstacles 1/25/2019 6:37 PM
14 all 1/25/2019 4:57 PM
15 I have not tried crossing those roads by walking.1/25/2019 3:08 PM
16 safety is not an issue for me 1/23/2019 3:16 PM
Hillcrest Drive
Hopkins Place
Brookfield Road/Williams Glen Road
Other location (please specify)
27 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
100.00%37
67.57%25
48.65%18
45.95%17
32.43%12
Q16 Please list up to 5 "hot spots" along Trumansburg Road/Route
96. These locations should indicate where specific improvement(s) are
needed. (Specify improvement type).
Answered: 37 Skipped: 49
#HOT SPOT 1 DATE
1 Speed way too fast on Trumansburg road by Candlewyck, Bundy and way to hospital 6/21/2019 2:14 AM
2 NEP to CMC 6/10/2019 3:07 AM
3 Not needed 5/28/2019 1:00 PM
4 Cayuga Medical Center 5/23/2019 3:06 PM
5 there needs to be a real sidewalk from the end of it at Cliff Street to at least the Medical Center 5/22/2019 7:26 PM
6 from West Hill Drive - Difficult to walk to anywhere but CMC w/o sidewalk 5/22/2019 6:29 PM
7 Hospital & 96: Roundabout or left turn lanes needed to prevent passing in shoulder/to right of left-
turning vehicles..
5/22/2019 2:53 PM
8 Bus stops along 96 are dangerously close to the road, no shelter or seating 5/22/2019 2:20 PM
9 Pretty much the whole length after the sidewalk ends 5/22/2019 2:01 PM
10 Turning into/out of Museum of the Earth 5/22/2019 1:58 PM
11 Indian Creek Farm crossing 5/16/2019 8:35 PM
12 Speed should be lowered to the hospital 5/7/2019 9:23 PM
13 Lower the speed to the hospital 5/7/2019 9:00 PM
14 CMC entrance 5/5/2019 9:12 PM
15 Sidewalk north of the city line 5/1/2019 11:19 PM
16 Bundy road 4/25/2019 4:47 AM
17 All areas on Tburg Road are dangerous for walkers 4/15/2019 2:26 PM
18 bundy road intersection - left turn lane going north on 96 4/13/2019 7:08 PM
19 Cliff road to Cauga Medical Center 4/10/2019 9:30 PM
20 Sidewalk on Cliff Street - Cinders are not cleaned off sidewalk and it is hazardous 4/10/2019 5:57 PM
21 Woolf Lane 4/10/2019 12:43 PM
22 Cars turning on Bundy Road. Blinking light?4/8/2019 9:28 PM
23 The curve up hill shortly after speed limit increases 4/1/2019 1:43 PM
24 In front of Finger Lakes Acupuncture (many accidents - need slower speed limit?)3/26/2019 4:37 PM
25 Area Not covered, but just past Hayt's Road, the Indian Creek bottleneck culvert, way tp narro and
on a corner
3/15/2019 2:01 PM
26 Vinegar Hill Road- hard to get into traffic, better visibility?2/20/2019 9:36 PM
27 Harris B Dates drive sidewalk - NO separation of sidewalk form street!2/8/2019 8:39 PM
28 none - not safe to walk along this road 2/8/2019 8:38 PM
29 In front of Northeast Peds - no crosswalk, fast traffic 2/8/2019 6:05 PM
30 Whole route needs separated sidewalk or multitude trail 1/26/2019 3:33 PM
31 CMC Medical Center 1/26/2019 12:49 AM
32 where the sidewalk first ends, it's difficult 1/25/2019 6:37 PM
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Hot Spot 1
Hot Spot 2
Hot Spot 3
Hot Spot 4
Hot Spot 5
28 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
33 Hospital Intersection needs green arrows 1/25/2019 3:39 PM
34 Hillcrest Drive/Hopkins needs a traffic light 1/25/2019 3:36 PM
35 Cliff and Brookfield 1/25/2019 3:17 PM
36 In front of Finger Lakes Acupuncture (many accidents each year)1/25/2019 2:40 PM
37 Bundy Road (cross walk/sidewalk or bus waiting area)1/25/2019 1:25 PM
#HOT SPOT 2 DATE
1 Bundy road intersection lack in crossing 6/21/2019 2:14 AM
2 Dates dr 6/10/2019 3:07 AM
3 Not needed 5/28/2019 1:00 PM
4 Museum of the Earth 5/23/2019 3:06 PM
5 Hospital & 96: Paved pull-off for T-Cat near intersection (northbound) so it does not cause
obstruction.
5/22/2019 2:53 PM
6 Between City/Town line and Cayuga Medical Center: need sidewalks 5/22/2019 2:20 PM
7 Sidewalks to hospital 5/7/2019 9:23 PM
8 Bus stop along the way not safe.5/7/2019 9:00 PM
9 Cayuga medical 4/25/2019 4:47 AM
10 All areas on Tburg Road are dangerous 4/15/2019 2:26 PM
11 cliff street and vinegar hill, poor visibility south turn - weeds 4/13/2019 7:08 PM
12 Where speed limit is 45 on T'Burg Road should be reduced to 30 where so many houses, curves
and pedestrians are found
4/10/2019 5:57 PM
13 Duboise Road 4/10/2019 12:43 PM
14 Cars turning into Overlook headed north, turn lane?4/8/2019 9:28 PM
15 Right after current walking area going up hill stops 4/1/2019 1:43 PM
16 Between Cliff Street & hospital (need sidewalk, many walkers daily)3/26/2019 4:37 PM
17 by Candlewyck Apts, too narrow and steep. Run pipes, then level 3/15/2019 2:01 PM
18 Between Cayuga Ridge and CMC- many accidents, lower speed limit 2/20/2019 9:36 PM
19 Harris B Dates Drive Ext. - The mix of parking and use as a thoroughfare is a dangerous mess -
especially with the pediatric practice there.
2/8/2019 8:39 PM
20 it's all dangerous 1/25/2019 6:37 PM
21 Hayts Rd is dangerous due to cars speeding around stopped turning traffic 1/25/2019 3:39 PM
22 Cayuga medical to the town line @ Williams Glen needs a lower speed limit 1/25/2019 3:36 PM
23 entrance to the elderly home 1/25/2019 3:17 PM
24 Between where the sidewalk ends and Cayuga Medical Center (many people walking on shoulder
or in road)
1/25/2019 2:40 PM
25 Hayts Road (cross walk/car turning lane)1/25/2019 1:25 PM
#HOT SPOT 3 DATE
1 Intersection issue with Trumansburg Rd and Bundy, cars pass on shoulder 6/21/2019 2:14 AM
2 Not needed 5/28/2019 1:00 PM
3 Indian Creek Farm 5/23/2019 3:06 PM
4 Bike lane 5/7/2019 9:23 PM
5 Crossing 96 to get to bus stop at Hillcrest Dr. dangerous.5/7/2019 9:00 PM
6 same as #1 and 2 4/15/2019 2:26 PM
7 Lakeside nursing home - employee speeding and unsafe peel outs - speed bumps in their main
driveway
4/13/2019 7:08 PM
8 Cliff Street is too narrow to ride bike in street, tractor trailers come within 12 inches of curb 4/10/2019 5:57 PM
9 Cars turning into CM headed south, turn lane?4/8/2019 9:28 PM
10 Are to your LEFT side of RT 96, no way to walk on that side 4/1/2019 1:43 PM
11 Bundy Road (needs bus stop, many people waiting in the ditch)3/26/2019 4:37 PM
12 walking uphill,in general, I like to face traffic, The left side is way too near and steep, pipes or
widening need to be done
3/15/2019 2:01 PM
29 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
13 Hayts Road- almost slid into traffic on ice/many accidents- hard to see road in dark. Light? slower
speed up to Indian Creek Farm
2/20/2019 9:36 PM
14 Bundy Rd Hayts Rd is dangerous due to cars speeding around stopped turning traffic 1/25/2019 3:39 PM
15 Vinegar Hill needs a four way stop 1/25/2019 3:36 PM
16 entrance to the Museum 1/25/2019 3:17 PM
17 Bundy Road (many people waiting for bus while standing in the ditch)1/25/2019 2:40 PM
18 Museum of the Earth (sidewalk)1/25/2019 1:25 PM
#HOT SPOT 4 DATE
1 Cars continue to pass on shoulder at aggressive speeds 6/21/2019 2:14 AM
2 Not needed 5/28/2019 1:00 PM
3 All Apartments/Brookdale 5/23/2019 3:06 PM
4 Lighting for pedestrians and safe bus stops 5/7/2019 9:23 PM
5 Sidewalks need to continue to the hospital.5/7/2019 9:00 PM
6 same as #1 and 2 4/15/2019 2:26 PM
7 Signs along 96 needed for decibel reduction - jake braking, loud stereos, mufflers, exhaust 4/13/2019 7:08 PM
8 All of 96 is too crowded and treated like a highway for most 4/10/2019 5:57 PM
9 trail down to Black diamond through Holochuck homes development 4/8/2019 9:28 PM
10 96 stretch from Overlook/Cayuga Prof/Museum to Bundy Rd 4/1/2019 1:43 PM
11 The whole corridor needs lighting 3/26/2019 4:37 PM
12 again, with steep....too many layers of macadam from Candlewick Apts to Jacksonville 3/15/2019 2:01 PM
13 Exit museum parking lot, heavy traffic at times, lower speed, adjust time on CMC light 2/20/2019 9:36 PM
14 CAndelwyck residents probably need a light 1/25/2019 3:36 PM
15 entrance to medical offices just past hospital 1/25/2019 3:17 PM
16 Between Hopkins & Vinegar Hill (blind curve, dangerous to walk on)1/25/2019 2:40 PM
17 Connection to BDT 1/25/2019 1:25 PM
#HOT SPOT 5 DATE
1 Trumansburg Rd and Bundy not safe. I live at intersection and cars aggressively passing on
shoulder have completely taken out my mailbox and past on a regular basis.
6/21/2019 2:14 AM
2 Not needed 5/28/2019 1:00 PM
3 Crosswalks needed at established bus stops.5/7/2019 9:23 PM
4 Clear bike lanes better lights 5/7/2019 9:00 PM
5 same as #1 and 2 4/15/2019 2:26 PM
6 many animals hit between hospital and candlewyck 4/13/2019 7:08 PM
7 No signs for bus stops with buses coming from Trumansburg 4/1/2019 1:43 PM
8 The whole corridor needs reduced speed limit 3/26/2019 4:37 PM
9 sidewalks would only be troublesome to homeowners 3/15/2019 2:01 PM
10 Indian Creek Farm- level of activity and speed of traffic and children. Lower speed 2/20/2019 9:36 PM
11 By Williams Glen (not much shoulder to walk on)1/25/2019 2:40 PM
12 Connection to FLT west hill Wildway 1/25/2019 1:25 PM
30 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
14.86%11
9.46%7
8.11%6
29.73%22
37.84%28
Q17 Please tell us if you would be more likely to walk along Trumansburg
Road/Route 96 if pedestrian infrastructure is improved.
Answered: 74 Skipped: 12
TOTAL 74
Very unlikely
Unlikely
Neither likely
nor unlikely
Likely
Very likely
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Very unlikely
Unlikely
Neither likely nor unlikely
Likely
Very likely
31 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
Q18 Of the following facilities or amenities, which would most likely
increase your current level of walking on Trumansburg Road/Route 96?
Select and rank your top 5 choices, with 1 representing the lowest priority
and 5 representing the highest priority improvement.
Answered: 67 Skipped: 19
Signed
pedestrian...
Traffic
calming...
Improved
connectivity...
Improved
connectivity...
32 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
Continuity of
sidewalk system
Improved
lighting
Improved
sidewalk...
Shared use
paths (adjac...
Shared use
paths (not...
33 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
30.77%
12
17.95%
7
15.38%
6
12.82%
5
23.08%
9
39
12.00%
6
6.00%
3
22.00%
11
20.00%
10
40.00%
20
50
11.76%
6
13.73%
7
11.76%
6
21.57%
11
41.18%
21
51
12.28%
7
1.75%
1
7.02%
4
35.09%
20
43.86%
25
57
12.28%
7
7.02%
4
15.79%
9
21.05%
12
43.86%
25
57
14.63%
6
19.51%
8
26.83%
11
14.63%
6
24.39%
10
41
23.81%
10
14.29%
6
19.05%
8
16.67%
7
26.19%
11
42
15.22%
7
17.39%
8
15.22%
7
26.09%
12
26.09%
12
46
14.89%
7
12.77%
6
10.64%
5
19.15%
9
42.55%
20
47
14.89%
7
14.89%
7
21.28%
10
21.28%
10
27.66%
13
47
52.78%
19
13.89%
5
16.67%
6
8.33%
3
8.33%
3
36
#OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE
1 For walking? Who made this survey??5/28/2019 1:00 PM
2 I think pedestrian signals are not necessarily safer, because they're too easy for drivers to ignore.5/22/2019 2:20 PM
3 NONE. IT IS TOO DANGEROUS EVERYWHERE 4/15/2019 2:26 PM
4 happy with my vehicle, unhappy with traffic and noise of jake brake trucks etc 4/13/2019 7:08 PM
1 2 3 4 5
Pedestrian
signals and...
Increased
seating and...
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
1 2 3 4 5 TOTAL
Signed pedestrian routes
Traffic calming measures to reduce speeds
Improved connectivity to City of Ithaca
Improved connectivity to the State Black Diamond Trail
Continuity of sidewalk system
Improved lighting
Improved sidewalk maintenance
Shared use paths (adjacent to the road)
Shared use paths (not adjacent to the road)
Pedestrian signals and crosswalks at intersections
Increased seating and rest points
34 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
5 None of these factors would matter in attempting to justify the need for a sidewalk. Just because
soil is available doesn't mean it is suitable for a sidewalk. The safefest alternatives to connecting
Black Diamond trial and the City of Ithaca sidewalks already exist, those are limebikes, rideshare,
lyft and uber. Why is the county even considering such a proposal to appease a few bike or hiker
enthusiasts. If they want to continue to risk their lives on route 96 well I just pray when they are hit
by a driver that it doesn't happen in front of my home.
4/10/2019 9:30 PM
6 build it they will come does not apply to this issue 2/8/2019 5:16 PM
7 Wasn't able to list all my choices, survey error.1/26/2019 12:49 AM
8 Drivers tend to make the choice to ignore pedestrian crosswalks through the city. Unless people
are going to learn by being ticketed, they don’t help that much. Most important are slower traffic,
breaks in traffic to safely cross, hopefully with signals, and connections to the city and the black
diamond trail.
1/25/2019 3:36 PM
9 I'm not able to choose "5" for all -- I would like to choose 5 for every one of these items 1/25/2019 2:40 PM
35 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
34.72%25
20.83%15
18.06%13
8.33%6
18.06%13
Q19 Please tell us about your household. Where do you reside?
Answered: 72 Skipped: 14
TOTAL 72
On Trumansburg
On Trumansburg
On Trumansburg
On Trumansburg
On Trumansburg
On Trumansburg
On Trumansburg
Road/Route 96
Road/Route 96
Road/Route 96
Road/Route 96
Road/Route 96
Road/Route 96
Road/Route 96
Less than a half
Less than a half
Less than a half
Less than a half
Less than a half
Less than a half
Less than a half
mile away from
mile away from
mile away from
mile away from
mile away from
mile away from
mile away from
Trumansburg
Trumansburg
Trumansburg
Trumansburg
Trumansburg
Trumansburg
Trumansburg
Not within a half
Not within a half
Not within a half
Not within a half
Not within a half
Not within a half
Not within a half
mile from the
mile from the
mile from the
mile from the
mile from the
mile from the
mile from the
corridor, but
corridor, but
corridor, but
corridor, but
corridor, but
corridor, but
corridor, but
within the Town ...
within the Town ...
within the Town ...
within the Town ...
within the Town ...
within the Town ...
within the Town ...
Not within a half
Not within a half
Not within a half
Not within a half
Not within a half
Not within a half
Not within a half
mile from the
mile from the
mile from the
mile from the
mile from the
mile from the
mile from the
corridor, but
corridor, but
corridor, but
corridor, but
corridor, but
corridor, but
corridor, but
within the City ...
within the City ...
within the City ...
within the City ...
within the City ...
within the City ...
within the City ...
None of the above
None of the above
None of the above
None of the above
None of the above
None of the above
None of the above
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
On Trumansburg Road/Route 96
Less than a half mile away from Trumansburg Road/Route 96
Not within a half mile from the corridor, but within the Town of Ithaca
Not within a half mile from the corridor, but within the City of Ithaca
None of the above
36 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
Q20 Please tell us about your household.
Answered: 72 Skipped: 14
1 2 3 4 5+
Adults
Children
Number of
automobiles
Number of
bicycles
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
1 2 3 4 5+TOTAL
37 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
19.44%
14
65.28%
47
8.33%
6
6.94%
5
0.00%
0
72
25.71%
9
65.71%
23
2.86%
1
2.86%
1
2.86%
1
35
23.08%
15
58.46%
38
12.31%
8
3.08%
2
3.08%
2
65
14.04%
8
38.60%
22
15.79%
9
17.54%
10
14.04%
8
57
Adults
Children
Number of automobiles
Number of bicycles
38 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
0.00%0
0.00%0
5.63%4
56.34%40
29.58%21
8.45%6
0.00%0
Q21 Please tell us about yourself. What is your age group? (Select one).
Answered: 71 Skipped: 15
TOTAL 71
K-8
High School
19-29
30-49
50-64
65-79
80+
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
K-8
High School
19-29
30-49
50-64
65-79
80+
39 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
Q22 Please list any other comments below regarding pedestrian access
along Trumansburg Road/Route 96.
Answered: 43 Skipped: 43
#RESPONSES DATE
1 This is very much needed. Speed must be reduced, then regular, connected and safe sidewalks to
facilitate flow. Please stop the regular traffic driving on the shoulder, and create some improved
intersections and crosswalks for Trumansburg Rd and Bundy. I feel that I will get hit by a car every
day while crossing the street for the bus, or walking home from the bus stop from work, or even
checking my mail in the mailbox. Not to mention that I'll get hit by a car waiting for the bus at the
bus stop. It is a mess, but your efforts could make a true, much needed and appreciated change.
People will actually be able to enjoy this area: walks, dog walks, bike rides and the obvious of
getting to work, school or appointments. I have a preschooler, and would love to feel comfortable
being outside of my house. For the first many years it felt very segregated and cut off from the rest
of Ithaca. I had no way to even take him for a walk in his stroller, without using my car. This could
be so lovely for people and families to be able to get out and connect back to town or further
towards hospital and trail. Thank you! Please make this happen!
6/21/2019 2:25 AM
2 It should NOT be 'fixed' for pedestrians or cyclists. This is getting absurd how much money is
wasted on areas to make room for cyclists and pedestrians. Not every dang road needs to be
suited for them. NOT necessary! Cyclists already are LEGALLY supposed to follow the rules of
vehicle and traffic laws. Which they don't. Instead of spending more of our tax dollars on
unnecessary things, offer bicycle safety courses and tell them to follow the rules of the road!
Enough of this crap
5/28/2019 1:05 PM
3 Please consider extending to Indian Creek farm. Very excited for this project!5/25/2019 3:29 PM
4 I feel much safer on sidewalks or bike paths that are separated from vehicle traffic! Walking or
biking on the shoulder with no raised barrier feels very unsafe to me!
5/24/2019 11:39 PM
5 Build a sidewalk before someone gets killed.5/22/2019 7:26 PM
6 Sidewalk to Indian Creek would be nice!5/22/2019 4:50 PM
7 I mostly drive on Route 96, and I fear for the safety of people I see walking or waiting for the bus
along the road. A sidewalk would be wonderful.
5/22/2019 2:21 PM
8 I work in the corridor area and drive through it on a daily basis. Even though I would not be likely
to walk along 96 myself, I see many people doing so and it is not safe for them. I would like to see
the corridor improved for their benefit.
5/22/2019 2:00 PM
9 I'm concerned it would make bike travel more difficult.5/16/2019 8:36 PM
10 Protective barriers in high risk area.5/7/2019 9:29 PM
11 Concerned about pulling in to driveway on west side of Rte 96 when heading north. Often must
wait for gap in on-coming traffic. Cars coming up behind me are usually traveling quite fast and if
drivers not paying attention could ram into back of me. Would not want a sidewalk to interfere with
the ability of cars coming behind to pull around me on my right side where the shoulder is now.
5/5/2019 9:20 PM
12 Would like a sidewalk north of the city line 5/1/2019 11:21 PM
13 Speed restriction on cars.4/25/2019 4:48 AM
14 The downside of additional pedestrian traffic is potential increased crime. We have had our cars
broken into several times and fear more foot traffic might increase this.
4/16/2019 8:18 PM
15 This road is too dangerous for people to have the ability to walk. I have been in my residence for
53+ years and the traffic has increased more than 10 fold since. I don't want to see dead bodies
on my lawn along with the animal bodies I see on a weekly basis !!! Also the employees at Cayuga
Ridge and the construction and delivery vehicles at Cayuga Ridge are not careful and race out of
their driveway all the time.
4/15/2019 2:33 PM
16 Trumansburg road is too dangerous for walking - even with sidewalks, we have lived here the
longest of any neighbors, 54 years at 1223 Tburg rd, next to Lakeside. What we see and hear
every day is enough to write a multivolume encyclopedia
4/13/2019 7:10 PM
17 This request is ridiculous, unsafe and inhuman, not only for the bikers, hikers but for the residents
as well. That's all I are epidemic needles in my front yard due to the homeless and other vagrants
wondering pass my property.
4/10/2019 9:40 PM
18 Hello Mike and/or the Planning Dept. I am getting too old for all this ( or am I ? ). I now have bad
knees !
4/10/2019 9:06 PM
40 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
19 Trumansburg Road is loud, polluted and too many trucks to qualify as a street to walk on for
pleasure. It is only walked on by those who really have no choices. Putting sidewalks in where
there are none is difficult as there is a hill on one side and private property on the other side. More
connectivity to a path which is off Trumansburg Road would improve the conditions of those that
must walk on it. Really what needs to be done (rather than these "bandaid" measures is put
another bridge over the inlet next to Island Fitness and perhaps build an expressway from the
hospital to that bridge through the woods which is currently the Black Diamond Trail (or nearby it).
Then the traffic would reduce, a nice sidewalk can be put along that expressway and It would
actually give Trumansburg Road a break of carrying the majority of the commuter traffic into
Ithaca.
4/10/2019 6:04 PM
20 Too much large semi-truck traffic.4/10/2019 12:45 PM
21 I'm thrilled about the idea of having a connected sidewalk between Cliff Street & Cayuga Medical
Center! There are many people walking on the side of the road, and waiting in the ditch for the
TCAT bus. There are many car accidents that happen yearly in front of our house due to high
traffic speeds. This is a very important safety issue for our family. If there was a safe way to walk
or bike from our house to downtown, we would go from NEVER walking/biking to walking/biking as
a family weekly or daily! THANK YOU for your efforts!
3/26/2019 4:39 PM
22 Only what Ive stated....wider shoulder!3/15/2019 2:02 PM
23 I have attempted walking through the woods to avoid the traffic and it was a disaster. I ended up
on the Black Diamond but broke a shoe. I work in this corridor and many of our staff is through
Cornell's work study program and depend on public transportation and walking. We hope to see a
larger amount of people coming to our location that are underserved and may not have access to
their own transportation. This is very important to my place of employment and will open up to
more visitors!
2/20/2019 9:39 PM
24 I am more interested in cycling than walking, so safe bike corridors or connectivity to black
diamond are of great value to me
2/9/2019 4:29 PM
25 I rarely ever see anyone walking along this section. I only see people cross street to wait for bus. If
people are walking in road, it would be dangerous.
2/8/2019 8:39 PM
26 Pedestrians arriving to Northeast Peds via TCAT that are dropped off on the opposite side of the
road have trouble crossing Rte 96 safely with children, due to the speed of the traffic. Additionally,
people walking to Northeast Peds along the road coming from the apartment complex with children
are very unsafe - particularly in the winter months when the shoulder is slushy or more narrow and
traffic is close to them - a sidewalk would be a huge improvement, along with a crosswalk. Keep
small children away from the road.
2/8/2019 6:11 PM
27 all a side walk will do is wast money on a walk no one will use and lower the speed limit cause
more back ups
2/8/2019 5:18 PM
28 It would be great to extend the work T-Burg has done on the Village Center sidewalks and extend
all the way Ithaca
1/30/2019 3:57 AM
29 Priority to make transportation safe and accessible for people who can't drive or don't have access
to a motor vehicle.
1/26/2019 3:34 PM
30 I like to take the grandkids to the BD trail and to the Museum, and it would be nice if there were
better access. One of them bikes to a friend up there, and two of them go to LACS (they walk
mostly).
1/25/2019 10:49 PM
31 I appreciate your addressing problem 1/25/2019 6:38 PM
32 Please consider measures on rt 79 as well!1/25/2019 5:34 PM
33 I don't currently live on the West Hill area, but it is one of the areas of Ithaca I could afford to live in
if I moved and the biggest thing that keeps me from looking there is lack of walkability and access
to resources.
1/25/2019 5:09 PM
34 Improve access lighting and safety for black diamond trail, then reassess need for sidewalk on 96.1/25/2019 5:00 PM
35 I do not reside but work in the corridor 1/25/2019 4:34 PM
36 I would never walk this road because the traffic is too aggressive and high speed. People don't
follow the law of not driving on the shoulder, and the wide shoulders encourage the dangerous
behavior. If the road were safer I'd definitely use it for walking.
1/25/2019 3:41 PM
37 We keep our kids’ bicycles at their grandmother’s house downtown because there is nowhere for
them to ride by our house.
1/25/2019 3:37 PM
38 I work in a school with many families that live in Overlook. More pedestrian and bike access to
Ithaca is essential
1/25/2019 3:29 PM
39 Better bus Signage and safe/warm places to wait for buses. Enforced speed limits. Better road
signage in general. The sidewalk stops right about where I live, (Cliff St/Brookfield Rd) right on the
city limit where people are required to slow down, which they do NOT. I can't even check my mail
safely!
1/25/2019 3:25 PM
40 I walk the Waterfront Trail a lot but currently consider walking along Trumansburg Rd as unsafe.1/25/2019 3:13 PM
41 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
41 I wasn't able to use the radio buttons in many sections, it would only allow me to select one "5" in
each section. I have been concerned about the foot traffic, traffic speeds, and lack of sidewalk on
Rt 96 for 8 years. I have seen multiple accidents in front of our house when cars have been rear-
ended because they are turning into Finger Lakes Acupuncture and other cars are going too fast. I
have seen dozens of people on a weekly basis waiting for the TCAT while standing in a drainage
ditch. I am not able to go for a walk or bike ride safely with my family. I would love to be part of
finding a safe solution for this corridor. Thank you for addressing this!
1/25/2019 2:43 PM
42 While not our personal experience, we see many people walking with flashlights or their phones
as flashlights walking up and down 96, usually on the south bound side. We’re available for
pedestrian counts if you need further study.
1/25/2019 1:29 PM
43 There's not enough attention paid to bicycling in this survey. This part of Rt 96 is a comfortable
way to bike south, and not real hard to bike north uphill. I enjoy biking in Ithaca because the
downhill rides are so pleasant, and the west side of 96 in this study needs better road surface and
a bike lane.
1/23/2019 3:20 PM
42 / 44
NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
NYS Route 96 / Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
Public Information Meeting #2 - September 18, 2019 from 5 to 7pm
Museum of the Earth, 1259 Trumansburg Rd
Notes written by: Rebecca Minas, IEAust, CPEng, Project Manager, Barton and Loguidice, DPC
Jay Lambrix (Ithaca-Tompkins County Transportation Council (ITCTC)
·Has an analysis of the additional usage been done to understand induced demand for
pedestrian/cyclist use in this area if these sidewalks/connections were installed? Would be
interesting and helpful for finding funding. Does B&L have an analytical tool that they use to
analyze the induced demand?
·Wider multi-use trail preferable to allow for cyclists to use off-road option, avoiding conflicts
between cars/cyclists.
·Available funding options for design and construct? TAP, County TIP (opens in October for new
projects)
·Improve signage/lighting for Black Diamond Trail connection
·Consider lighting needs for Black Diamond Trail and connection for evening commute
·Cyclists will use sidewalk, allow provision for cyclist/pedestrian to safely co-exist
Residents at 1215 and 1213 Trumansburg Rd (adjacent to Seventh Day Church)
·High crime in this area (theft from cars, theft of packages left on front step, day and night);
concern that sidewalk will bring additional foot traffic and increase crime
·Residents suggested that Holochuck Homes did not get funding and that this development is
anticipated to be abandoned.
·Resident sees numerous people daily walking south on east side of Trumansburg (in scrubs),
travelling presumably to the City or to Candlewyck apartments
·Cars are passing on the shoulder on the right-hand-side of cars when they are waiting to turn
left into driveways between Bundy and Harris B Dates. This creates dangerous situation for
people walking or trying to exit their driveway. Potential to increase length of guiderails for
additional protection of yard. Option to reduce shoulder width so that cars cannot pass on the
right?
·Traffic calming needed!
·Where mature trees will be lost due to install of sidewalk, these should be replaced with
screening/protection from new plantings.
·Round-about at Harris B Dates would offer safer access for pedestrians without slowing traffic. It
would have the added benefit of traffic calming (i.e. raised center)
·Would be nice to see this project continue up to Dubois Rd
Tee-Ann Hunter
·Strong voice for taking cyclists off the road and onto a ‘multi-user’ trail. Potential to reduce
shoulder and increase width of sidewalk for cyclists to co-exist with pedestrians?
·Urgent need for a new connection to Black Diamond trail from Bundy/Hillcrest Dr/Candlewyck
Dr. Walking/cycling south to City from Bundy along Trumansburg Rd is unpleasant and unsafe.
Property owner behind Hillcrest Dr may be amendable to easement for connection. Zoning on
NYS Route 96 / Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
Public Information Meeting #2 - September 18, 2019 from 5 to 7pm
Museum of the Earth, 1259 Trumansburg Rd
Notes written by: Rebecca Minas, IEAust, CPEng, Project Manager, Barton and Loguidice, DPC
this parcel is ‘conservation’, allowing space for up to 7-lots, leaving space for a trail connection.
An informal ‘road’ may already exist on that property.
·Road restriping needed
·Recommend meeting with DOT to incorporate ‘think outside the box’ and to incorporate safe
cyclist path into project design
·Need for sufficient shoulder to allow for emergency vehicle passage.
Resident at 1105 Trumansburg Rd
·Concern about removal of mature trees
·Real issue is that the speed needs to be reduced. 45mph speed limit is often disregarded.
Project may worsen the situation by promoting pedestrian traffic on an unpoliced dark rural
road with traffic at high speeds.
·Increasing fill on his property will worsen the existing dangerous situation with the steep slope
at the end of his driveway
·Will Town pay for destruction/removal of stone fence near front yard property boundary?
·Are curbs appropriate with nearby hospital and need for cars to pull over?
·How does this project consider proposed new housing? ‘conservation area’?
·Anticipated decrease in quality of life for many with additional pedestrian and car traffic.
Other local Residents
·Bus shelter desired at Williams Glenn on both sides of road
·Separate bikes from automobiles
·Need for connections to BD trail
APPENDIX E
Existing Conditions
Municipal Boundary
Crosswalks
Roads
Parcels
ROW
Building Footprints
Destinations
TCAT Bus Shelter
TCAT Bus Stops
Trails
Black Diamond Trail (TB 2)
Parks and Recreation
Lakes
50 ft Contours
Legend
TO WN O F I T HA C A
C I T Y O F I T H A C A
Trumansburg Road/Route 96 Pedestrian Study
Figure 1. Properties & Destinations
Municipal Boundary
50 ft Contours
10 ft Contours
Manholes
Hydrants
Valves
Road
Streams
Water Main
Sewer Main
Parcels
Cayuga Lake
ROW
Legend
CAYUGA LAKE
TO WN O F I T HA C A
C I T Y O F I T H A C A
Trumansburg Road/Route 96 Pedestrian Study
Figure 2. Utilities
Municipal Boundary
Road
Streams
100 ft Contours
10 ft Contours
Cayuga Lake
Recreation
Federally Regulated Wetland
National Register of Historic Places
Agricultural District
Significant Natural Community
Trails
Black Diamond Trail (TB 2)
Flood Zones
AE
X
X500
Legend
CAYUGA LAKE
TO WN O F I T HA C A
C I T Y O F I T HA C A
Trumansburg Road/Route 96 Pedestrian Study
Figure 3. Natural Resources
APPENDIX F
Traffic Data and Figures
ACCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET
Clear 2 40.0%
Cloudy 1 20.0%
Rain 1 20.0%
Snow 1 20.0%
Unspecified 0 0.0%
Total 5
WEATHER # ACC %
6 AM - 10 AM 0 0.0%
10 AM - 4 PM 4 80.0%
4 PM - 7 PM 1 20.0%
7 PM - 12 AM 0 0.0%
12 AM - 6 AM 0 0.0%
Total 5
TIME OF DAY # ACC %
Unspecified 0 0.0%
North 8 80.0%
Unspecified 0 0.0%
DIRECTION # ACC
South 1 10.0%
East 1 10.0%
West 0 0.0%
Northeast 0 0.0%
Northwest 0 0.0%
Southeast 0 0.0%
Southwest 0 0.0%
Total 10
# ACC %DIRECTION
Dry 3 60.0%
Wet 1 20.0%
Mud/Slush 0 0.0%
Snow/Ice 1 20.0%
Unspecified 0 0.0%
Total 5
LIGHT CONDITION # ACC
Sleet/Hail/Freezing Rain 0 0.0%
Fog/Smog/Smoke 0 0.0%
Rear End 3 60.0%
Total 5
Overtake 0 0.0%
Right Angle 0 0.0%
Left Turn 0 0.0%
Right Turn 0 0.0%
Fixed Object 0 0.0%
Head On 0 0.0%
Sideswipe 0 0.0%
Pedestrian 0 0.0%
Bicycle 0 0.0%
Parked Vehicle 0 0.0%
Backing 0 0.0%
Run Off The Road 0 0.0%
Animal 0 0.0%
Other 2 40.0%
Unspecified 0 0.0%
# ACC %# ACC ACCIDENT TYPE ACCIDENT TYPE
Total 5
Fatal 0 0.0%
Injury 0 0.0%
Property Damage 5 100.0%
Non-Reportable 0 0.0%
ACCIDENT SEVERITY # ACC %
Total 5
Sunday 2 40.0%
Monday 2 40.0%
Tuesday 1 20.0%
Wednesday 0 0.0%
Thursday 0 0.0%
Friday 0 0.0%
Saturday 0 0.0%
DAY OF WEEK # ACC %
Daylight 3 60.0%
Dawn/Dusk 1 20.0%
Total 5
Night 1 20.0%
Unspecified 0 0.0%
SUMMARY OF ACCIDENT SEVERITY BY YEAR:
Fatal Accidents
Injury Accidents
Property Damage Accidents
Non-Reportable Accidents
Total Accidents
SURFACE # ACC %
Passenger Cars 10 100.0%
Commercial Vehicles 0 0.0%
Total 10
TYPE OF VEHICLE # ACC %
Winter (Dec-Feb) 1
Total 5
20.0%
Spring (Mar-May) 0 0.0%
Summer (Jun-Aug) 2 40.0%
Fall (Sep-Nov)2 40.0%
TIME OF YEAR # ACC %
2014 2015 2016
0
2
0
2
0
0
2
0
2
0
0
1
0
1
0
REMARKS:All Accidents
%
DATE:7/30/2019
ROUTE:Trumansburg Rd.LOCATION:Trumansburg Rd. and Hayts Rd. Intersection
MUNICIPALITY:Ithaca COUNTY:Tompkins
REFERENCE MARKERS / NODESTIME PERIOD COVERED: 1/1/2014 12/31/2016 - -
HSA Software 3.0
DATE TIME#VEHICLESACC. SEVERI TYLIGHT CONDROAD CHARSURFACEWEATHERACCIDENT DESCRIPTIONPage 1 of 1DETAILS OF ACCIDENT HISTORYNo.CONTRIB.FACTORS TYPEKEY #Trumansburg Rd.Trumansburg Rd. and Hayts Rd. IntersectionIthacaTompkinsROUTE NUMBER/STREET NAME:LOCATION:MUNICIPALITY:COUNTY:REFERENCE MARKERS / NODES: - 1/1/201412/31/201636PERIOD STUDIED: FROM: TO: MONTHSTrumansburg Rd aRSB7/30/2019CASE No.FILE:BY:DATE:11/7/2016 12:58 2RendPDO 1 1 1 1 4 9 Vehicle accident at Trumansburg Rd. and Hayts Rd.116/1/2015 11:30 2RendPDO 1 1 2 3 4 66 19 Vehicle rear end at Trumansburg Rd. and Hayts Rd.222/15/2015 11:45 1OthrPDO 5 1 4 4 66 Collision with embankment3311/30/2014 15:53 4RendPDO 3 1 1 2 4 9 19 rear end accident involving 4 vehicles447/15/2014 17:35 1OthrPDO 1 1 1 1 4 5 collision with embankment55HSA Software 3.0
Northbound
Trumansburg Rd.
Trumansburg Rd.
_ _ _
124
53
SYMBOLS MANNER OF COLLISION
MOVING VEHICLE
TURNING VEHICLE
BACKING VEHICLE
PARKED VEHICLE
RECORD NUMBER
A ANIMAL
PEDESTRIAN
BICYCLIST
FIXED OBJECT
P
B
REAR END
OVERTAKE
OUT OF CONTROL
LEFT TURN
LEFT TURN
HEAD ON
RIGHT TURN
RIGHT TURN
RIGHT ANGLE
SIDE SWIPEFatal999
COLLISION DIAGRAM
MUNICIPALITY:Ithaca COUNTY:Tompkins
INTERSECTION:Trumansburg Rd.
PERIOD:3 MONTHS0 FROM 1/1/2014 TO 12/31/2016
FILE:Trumansburg Rd a
YEARS BY:RSB DATE:7/30/2019
CASE # :
Key Number =
HSA Software 3.0
REFERENCE MARKERS / NODES:
years3.0
veh./day )7928
total accidents in5
ACCIDENT RATE
(( 1,000,000 ))*
(365 days/yr.)*years )3.0(*(
=0.58
1/1/2014 12/31/2016
All Accidents
Segment
Intersection
accidents per million entering vehicles
-
(Statewide average rate )
=
=
ACCIDENT RATE CALCULATIONS
TIME PERIOD:
HSA Software 3.0
ROUTE:Trumansburg Rd.
LOCATION:Trumansburg Rd. and Hayts Rd. Intersection
REMARKS:
-
ACCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET
Clear 5 31.3%
Cloudy 10 62.5%
Rain 0 0.0%
Snow 1 6.2%
Unspecified 0 0.0%
Total 16
WEATHER # ACC %
6 AM - 10 AM 3 17.6%
10 AM - 4 PM 7 41.2%
4 PM - 7 PM 4 23.5%
7 PM - 12 AM 0 0.0%
12 AM - 6 AM 1 5.9%
Total 17
TIME OF DAY # ACC %
Unspecified 2 11.8%
North 9 31.0%
Unspecified 0 0.0%
DIRECTION # ACC
South 12 41.4%
East 0 0.0%
West 8 27.6%
Northeast 0 0.0%
Northwest 0 0.0%
Southeast 0 0.0%
Southwest 0 0.0%
Total 29
# ACC %DIRECTION
Dry 9 56.3%
Wet 5 31.3%
Mud/Slush 0 0.0%
Snow/Ice 2 12.4%
Unspecified 0 0.0%
Total 16
LIGHT CONDITION # ACC
Sleet/Hail/Freezing Rain 0 0.0%
Fog/Smog/Smoke 0 0.0%
Rear End 8 47.1%
Total 16
Overtake 1 5.9%
Right Angle 0 0.0%
Left Turn 1 5.9%
Right Turn 1 5.9%
Fixed Object 1 5.9%
Head On 0 0.0%
Sideswipe 0 0.0%
Pedestrian 0 0.0%
Bicycle 0 0.0%
Parked Vehicle 0 0.0%
Backing 0 0.0%
Run Off The Road 0 0.0%
Animal 4 23.5%
Other 0 0.0%
Unspecified 0 0.0%
# ACC %# ACC ACCIDENT TYPE ACCIDENT TYPE
Total 16
Fatal 0 0.0%
Injury 0 0.0%
Property Damage 11 64.7%
Non-Reportable 5 29.4%
ACCIDENT SEVERITY # ACC %
Total 16
Sunday 1 5.9%
Monday 0 0.0%
Tuesday 5 29.4%
Wednesday 4 23.5%
Thursday 4 23.5%
Friday 2 11.8%
Saturday 0 0.0%
DAY OF WEEK # ACC %
Daylight 9 56.3%
Dawn/Dusk 1 6.3%
Total 16
Night 6 37.5%
Unspecified 0 0.0%
SUMMARY OF ACCIDENT SEVERITY BY YEAR:
Fatal Accidents
Injury Accidents
Property Damage Accidents
Non-Reportable Accidents
Total Accidents
SURFACE # ACC %
Passenger Cars 29 100.0%
Commercial Vehicles 0 0.0%
Total 29
TYPE OF VEHICLE # ACC %
Winter (Dec-Feb) 12
Total 16
75.0%
Spring (Mar-May) 1 6.3%
Summer (Jun-Aug) 2 12.5%
Fall (Sep-Nov)1 6.3%
TIME OF YEAR # ACC %
2014 2015 2016
0
8
0
6
2
0
7
0
4
3
0
1
0
1
0
REMARKS:All Accidents
%
DATE:7/30/2019
ROUTE:Trumansburg Rd.LOCATION:Trumansburg Rd. and Harris B. Dates Dr.
MUNICIPALITY:Ithaca COUNTY:Tompkins
REFERENCE MARKERS / NODESTIME PERIOD COVERED: 1/1/2014 12/31/2016 - -
HSA Software 3.0
DATE TIME#VEHICLESACC. SEVERI TYLIGHT CONDROAD CHARSURFACEWEATHERACCIDENT DESCRIPTIONPage 1 of 1DETAILS OF ACCIDENT HISTORYNo.CONTRIB.FACTORS TYPEKEY #Trumansburg Rd.Trumansburg Rd. and Harris B. Dates Dr.IthacaTompkinsROUTE NUMBER/STREET NAME:LOCATION:MUNICIPALITY:COUNTY:REFERENCE MARKERS / NODES: - 1/1/201412/31/201636PERIOD STUDIED: FROM: TO: MONTHSTrumansburg Rd HRSB7/30/2019CASE No.FILE:BY:DATE:0112/22/2015 15:24 2RtrnN/R 1 1 2 2 7 18 Vehicle right turn at Trumansburg Rd. and Harris B. Dates Dr.2212/15/2015 17:47 2RendN/R 5 1 1 2 4 19 Vehicle rear end at Trumansburg Rd. and Harris B Dates Dr.3312/9/2015 16:05 2RendPDO 3 1 1 2 4 19 Vehicle rear end at Trumansburg Rd. and Harris B. Dates Dr.4410/6/2015 4:37 1AnmlPDO 4 1 1 1 61 collision with deer552/5/2015 7:47 2RendN/R 1 1 4 2 66 4 19 Vehicle accident at Trumansburg Rd. and Harris B. Dates Dr.6612/19/2014 15:04 2LtrnN/R 1 1 2 2 4 7 17 Vehicle left turn at Harris B. Dates Dr. and Trumansburg Rd.776/3/2014 1AnmlPDO 1 1 1 1 61 Vehicle accident at Trumansburg Rd. and Harris B. Dates Dr.882/6/2014 17:45 3RendPDO 4 1 1 2 4 Rear end accident caused chain of incidents991/29/2014 12:52 2OvtkN/R 1 1 1 1 4 20 Vehicle overtaking at Trumansburg Rd. and Harris B. Dates Dr.10101/2/2014 6:08 1FixOPDO 4 1 4 4 66 Vehicle accident at Trumansburg Rd. and Harris B. Dates Dr.11112/27/2015 14:37 2RendPDO 1 1 1 1 4 9 Rear End accident possibly due to queues12126/25/2014 10:43 2RendPDO 1 1 1 2 4 9 rear end accident possibly due to queue13135/15/2016 14:50 2RendPDO 1 1 1 2 4 9 rear end accident possibly due to queue141412/29/2015 11:50 3RendPDO 1 1 2 2 4 19 66 rear end accident at Harris B Dates Blvd151512/3/2014 6:23 1AnmlPDO 4 1 2 2 61 collision with deer16162/20/2014 17:39 1AnmlPDO 4 1 2 1 61 collision with deer1717HSA Software 3.0
Northbound
Harris B Dates
Trumansburg Rd.
Trumansburg Rd.
W. Hill Dr
15
69
3 4 12 13 14
7
2
10
A
16 8
A
17
A
5
11
1
SYMBOLS MANNER OF COLLISION
MOVING VEHICLE
TURNING VEHICLE
BACKING VEHICLE
PARKED VEHICLE
RECORD NUMBER
A ANIMAL
PEDESTRIAN
BICYCLIST
FIXED OBJECT
P
B
REAR END
OVERTAKE
OUT OF CONTROL
LEFT TURN
LEFT TURN
HEAD ON
RIGHT TURN
RIGHT TURN
RIGHT ANGLE
SIDE SWIPEFatal999
COLLISION DIAGRAM
MUNICIPALITY:Ithaca COUNTY:Tompkins
INTERSECTION:Trumansburg Rd.
PERIOD:3 MONTHS0 FROM 1/1/2014 TO 12/31/2016
FILE:Trumansburg Rd H
YEARS BY:RSB DATE:7/30/2019
CASE # :
Key Number =
HSA Software 3.0
REFERENCE MARKERS / NODES:
years3.0
veh./day )10570
total accidents in17
ACCIDENT RATE
(( 1,000,000 ))*
(365 days/yr.)*years )3.0(*(
=1.47
1/1/2014 12/31/2016
All Accidents
Segment
Intersection
accidents per million entering vehicles
-
(Statewide average rate )
=
=
ACCIDENT RATE CALCULATIONS
TIME PERIOD:
HSA Software 3.0
ROUTE:Trumansburg Rd.
LOCATION:Trumansburg Rd. and Harris B. Dates Dr.
REMARKS:
-
ACCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET
Clear 0 0.0%
Cloudy 3 60.0%
Rain 0 0.0%
Snow 1 20.0%
Unspecified 1 20.0%
Total 5
WEATHER # ACC %
6 AM - 10 AM 1 20.0%
10 AM - 4 PM 0 0.0%
4 PM - 7 PM 2 40.0%
7 PM - 12 AM 1 20.0%
12 AM - 6 AM 1 20.0%
Total 5
TIME OF DAY # ACC %
Unspecified 0 0.0%
North 3 33.3%
Unspecified 0 0.0%
DIRECTION # ACC
South 5 55.6%
East 0 0.0%
West 1 11.1%
Northeast 0 0.0%
Northwest 0 0.0%
Southeast 0 0.0%
Southwest 0 0.0%
Total 9
# ACC %DIRECTION
Dry 2 40.0%
Wet 1 20.0%
Mud/Slush 0 0.0%
Snow/Ice 1 20.0%
Unspecified 1 20.0%
Total 5
LIGHT CONDITION # ACC
Sleet/Hail/Freezing Rain 0 0.0%
Fog/Smog/Smoke 0 0.0%
Rear End 2 40.0%
Total 5
Overtake 0 0.0%
Right Angle 0 0.0%
Left Turn 0 0.0%
Right Turn 1 20.0%
Fixed Object 0 0.0%
Head On 0 0.0%
Sideswipe 0 0.0%
Pedestrian 0 0.0%
Bicycle 0 0.0%
Parked Vehicle 0 0.0%
Backing 0 0.0%
Run Off The Road 0 0.0%
Animal 2 40.0%
Other 0 0.0%
Unspecified 0 0.0%
# ACC %# ACC ACCIDENT TYPE ACCIDENT TYPE
Total 5
Fatal 0 0.0%
Injury 0 0.0%
Property Damage 3 60.0%
Non-Reportable 2 40.0%
ACCIDENT SEVERITY # ACC %
Total 5
Sunday 1 20.0%
Monday 2 40.0%
Tuesday 2 40.0%
Wednesday 0 0.0%
Thursday 0 0.0%
Friday 0 0.0%
Saturday 0 0.0%
DAY OF WEEK # ACC %
Daylight 1 20.0%
Dawn/Dusk 0 0.0%
Total 5
Night 3 60.0%
Unspecified 1 20.0%
SUMMARY OF ACCIDENT SEVERITY BY YEAR:
Fatal Accidents
Injury Accidents
Property Damage Accidents
Non-Reportable Accidents
Total Accidents
SURFACE # ACC %
Passenger Cars 9 100.0%
Commercial Vehicles 0 0.0%
Total 9
TYPE OF VEHICLE # ACC %
Winter (Dec-Feb) 2
Total 5
40.0%
Spring (Mar-May) 1 20.0%
Summer (Jun-Aug) 2 40.0%
Fall (Sep-Nov)0 0.0%
TIME OF YEAR # ACC %
2014 2015 2016
0
1
0
0
1
0
3
0
2
1
0
1
0
1
0
REMARKS:All Accidents
%
DATE:7/30/2019
ROUTE:Trumansburg Rd.LOCATION:Trumansburg Rd. and Bundy Rd. Intersection
MUNICIPALITY:Ithaca COUNTY:Tompkins
REFERENCE MARKERS / NODESTIME PERIOD COVERED: 1/1/2014 12/31/2016 - -
HSA Software 3.0
DATE TIME#VEHICLESACC. SEVERI TYLIGHT CONDROAD CHARSURFACEWEATHERACCIDENT DESCRIPTIONPage 1 of 1DETAILS OF ACCIDENT HISTORYNo.CONTRIB.FACTORS TYPEKEY #Trumansburg Rd.Trumansburg Rd. and Bundy Rd. IntersectionIthacaTompkinsROUTE NUMBER/STREET NAME:LOCATION:MUNICIPALITY:COUNTY:REFERENCE MARKERS / NODES: - 1/1/201412/31/201636PERIOD STUDIED: FROM: TO: MONTHSTrumansburg & BuRSB7/30/2019CASE No.FILE:BY:DATE:12/8/2015 17:15 1AnmlPDO 1 61 collision with deet113/15/2015 19:38 1AnmlPDO 5 1 2 2 61 66 collision with deer226/6/2016 6:59 3RendPDO 1 1 1 2 4 9 5 rear end accident involving 3 vehicles336/10/2014 2:33 2RtrnN/R 4 1 1 2 18 27 WB vehicle turning right onto Trumansburg rd Struck SB vehicle441/12/2015 17:27 2RendN/R 4 1 4 4 9 19 66 rear end accident caused by road conditions at intersection55HSA Software 3.0
Northbound
Trumansburg Rd.
Trumansburg Rd.
Bundy Rd
5
3
A
1
A
2
4
SYMBOLS MANNER OF COLLISION
MOVING VEHICLE
TURNING VEHICLE
BACKING VEHICLE
PARKED VEHICLE
RECORD NUMBER
A ANIMAL
PEDESTRIAN
BICYCLIST
FIXED OBJECT
P
B
REAR END
OVERTAKE
OUT OF CONTROL
LEFT TURN
LEFT TURN
HEAD ON
RIGHT TURN
RIGHT TURN
RIGHT ANGLE
SIDE SWIPEFatal999
COLLISION DIAGRAM
MUNICIPALITY:Ithaca COUNTY:Tompkins
INTERSECTION:Trumansburg Rd. & Bundy Rd
PERIOD:3 MONTHS0 FROM 1/1/2014 TO 12/31/2016
FILE:Trumansburg & Bu
YEARS BY:RSB DATE:7/30/2019
CASE # :
Key Number =
HSA Software 3.0
REFERENCE MARKERS / NODES:
years3.0
veh./day )8500
total accidents in5
ACCIDENT RATE
(( 1,000,000 ))*
(365 days/yr.)*years )3.0(*(
=0.54
1/1/2014 12/31/2016
All Accidents
Segment
Intersection
accidents per million entering vehicles
-
(Statewide average rate )
=
=
ACCIDENT RATE CALCULATIONS
TIME PERIOD:
HSA Software 3.0
ROUTE:Trumansburg Rd.
LOCATION:Trumansburg Rd. and Bundy Rd. Intersection
REMARKS:
-
ACCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET
Clear 1 33.3%
Cloudy 2 66.7%
Rain 0 0.0%
Snow 0 0.0%
Unspecified 0 0.0%
Total 3
WEATHER # ACC %
6 AM - 10 AM 0 0.0%
10 AM - 4 PM 2 66.7%
4 PM - 7 PM 0 0.0%
7 PM - 12 AM 0 0.0%
12 AM - 6 AM 1 33.3%
Total 3
TIME OF DAY # ACC %
Unspecified 0 0.0%
North 0 0.0%
Unspecified 0 0.0%
DIRECTION # ACC
South 5 100.0%
East 0 0.0%
West 0 0.0%
Northeast 0 0.0%
Northwest 0 0.0%
Southeast 0 0.0%
Southwest 0 0.0%
Total 5
# ACC %DIRECTION
Dry 2 66.7%
Wet 1 33.3%
Mud/Slush 0 0.0%
Snow/Ice 0 0.0%
Unspecified 0 0.0%
Total 3
LIGHT CONDITION # ACC
Sleet/Hail/Freezing Rain 0 0.0%
Fog/Smog/Smoke 0 0.0%
Rear End 1 33.3%
Total 3
Overtake 1 33.3%
Right Angle 0 0.0%
Left Turn 0 0.0%
Right Turn 0 0.0%
Fixed Object 0 0.0%
Head On 0 0.0%
Sideswipe 0 0.0%
Pedestrian 1 33.3%
Bicycle 0 0.0%
Parked Vehicle 0 0.0%
Backing 0 0.0%
Run Off The Road 0 0.0%
Animal 0 0.0%
Other 0 0.0%
Unspecified 0 0.0%
# ACC %# ACC ACCIDENT TYPE ACCIDENT TYPE
Total 3
Fatal 1 33.3%
Injury 0 0.0%
Property Damage 2 66.7%
Non-Reportable 0 0.0%
ACCIDENT SEVERITY # ACC %
Total 3
Sunday 0 0.0%
Monday 0 0.0%
Tuesday 1 33.3%
Wednesday 0 0.0%
Thursday 0 0.0%
Friday 0 0.0%
Saturday 2 66.7%
DAY OF WEEK # ACC %
Daylight 2 66.7%
Dawn/Dusk 0 0.0%
Total 3
Night 1 33.3%
Unspecified 0 0.0%
SUMMARY OF ACCIDENT SEVERITY BY YEAR:
Fatal Accidents
Injury Accidents
Property Damage Accidents
Non-Reportable Accidents
Total Accidents
SURFACE # ACC %
Passenger Cars 5 100.0%
Commercial Vehicles 0 0.0%
Total 5
TYPE OF VEHICLE # ACC %
Winter (Dec-Feb) 2
Total 3
66.7%
Spring (Mar-May) 1 33.3%
Summer (Jun-Aug) 0 0.0%
Fall (Sep-Nov)0 0.0%
TIME OF YEAR # ACC %
2014 2015 2016
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
REMARKS:All Accidents
%
DATE:7/30/2019
ROUTE:Trumansburg Rd LOCATION:Trumansburg Rd & Campbell Ave
MUNICIPALITY:City of Ithaca COUNTY:Thompkins
REFERENCE MARKERS / NODESTIME PERIOD COVERED: 1/1/2014 12/31/2016 - -
HSA Software 3.0
DATE TIME#VEHICLESACC. SEVERI TYLIGHT CONDROAD CHARSURFACEWEATHERACCIDENT DESCRIPTIONPage 1 of 1DETAILS OF ACCIDENT HISTORYNo.CONTRIB.FACTORS TYPEKEY #Trumansburg RdTrumansburg Rd & Campbell AveCity of Ithaca ThompkinsROUTE NUMBER/STREET NAME:LOCATION:MUNICIPALITY:COUNTY:REFERENCE MARKERS / NODES: - 1/1/201412/31/201636PERIOD STUDIED: FROM: TO: MONTHSTrumansburg & CBETC7/30/2019CASE No.FILE:BY:DATE:1/24/2015 3:56 1PedFAT 5 1 1 2 14 21 Fatal Pedestrian accident at intersection111/9/2016 14:40 2RendPDO 1 1 1 1 4 9 rear end accident at intersection223/24/2015 11:03 2OvtkPDO 1 1 2 2 5 13 20 veh 1 overtook veh 2 as veh 2 was attempting to turn33HSA Software 3.0
Northbound
Trumansburg Rd
Trumansburg Rd
Campbell Ave
2
3
P
1
SYMBOLS MANNER OF COLLISION
MOVING VEHICLE
TURNING VEHICLE
BACKING VEHICLE
PARKED VEHICLE
RECORD NUMBER
A ANIMAL
PEDESTRIAN
BICYCLIST
FIXED OBJECT
P
B
REAR END
OVERTAKE
OUT OF CONTROL
LEFT TURN
LEFT TURN
HEAD ON
RIGHT TURN
RIGHT TURN
RIGHT ANGLE
SIDE SWIPEFatal999
COLLISION DIAGRAM
MUNICIPALITY:City of Ithaca COUNTY:Thompkins
INTERSECTION:Trumansburg Rd
PERIOD:3 MONTHS0 FROM 1/1/2014 TO 12/31/2016
FILE:Trumansburg & CB
YEARS BY:ETC DATE:7/30/2019
CASE # :
Key Number =
HSA Software 3.0
REFERENCE MARKERS / NODES:
years3.0
veh./day )10873
total accidents in3
ACCIDENT RATE
(( 1,000,000 ))*
(365 days/yr.)*years )3.0(*(
=0.25
1/1/2014 12/31/2016
All Accidents
Segment
Intersection
accidents per million entering vehicles
-
(Statewide average rate )
=
=
ACCIDENT RATE CALCULATIONS
TIME PERIOD:
HSA Software 3.0
ROUTE:Trumansburg Rd
LOCATION:Trumansburg Rd & Campbell Ave
REMARKS:
-
ACCIDENT SUMMARY SHEET
Clear 23 65.7%
Cloudy 8 22.9%
Rain 1 2.9%
Snow 3 8.6%
Unspecified 0 0.0%
Total 35
WEATHER # ACC %
6 AM - 10 AM 6 17.1%
10 AM - 4 PM 12 34.3%
4 PM - 7 PM 3 8.6%
7 PM - 12 AM 9 25.7%
12 AM - 6 AM 5 14.3%
Total 35
TIME OF DAY # ACC %
Unspecified 0 0.0%
North 20 44.4%
Unspecified 0 0.0%
DIRECTION # ACC
South 22 48.9%
East 1 2.2%
West 2 4.4%
Northeast 0 0.0%
Northwest 0 0.0%
Southeast 0 0.0%
Southwest 0 0.0%
Total 45
# ACC %DIRECTION
Dry 29 82.9%
Wet 4 11.4%
Mud/Slush 0 0.0%
Snow/Ice 2 5.7%
Unspecified 0 0.0%
Total 35
LIGHT CONDITION # ACC
Sleet/Hail/Freezing Rain 0 0.0%
Fog/Smog/Smoke 0 0.0%
Rear End 5 14.3%
Total 35
Overtake 2 5.7%
Right Angle 0 0.0%
Left Turn 1 2.9%
Right Turn 2 5.7%
Fixed Object 1 2.9%
Head On 0 0.0%
Sideswipe 0 0.0%
Pedestrian 0 0.0%
Bicycle 0 0.0%
Parked Vehicle 0 0.0%
Backing 0 0.0%
Run Off The Road 0 0.0%
Animal 18 51.4%
Other 6 17.1%
Unspecified 0 0.0%
# ACC %# ACC ACCIDENT TYPE ACCIDENT TYPE
Total 35
Fatal 0 0.0%
Injury 1 2.9%
Property Damage 21 60.0%
Non-Reportable 13 37.1%
ACCIDENT SEVERITY # ACC %
Total 35
Sunday 4 11.4%
Monday 4 11.4%
Tuesday 9 25.7%
Wednesday 3 8.6%
Thursday 6 17.1%
Friday 7 20.0%
Saturday 2 5.7%
DAY OF WEEK # ACC %
Daylight 16 45.7%
Dawn/Dusk 2 5.7%
Total 35
Night 17 48.6%
Unspecified 0 0.0%
SUMMARY OF ACCIDENT SEVERITY BY YEAR:
Fatal Accidents
Injury Accidents
Property Damage Accidents
Non-Reportable Accidents
Total Accidents
SURFACE # ACC %
Passenger Cars 44 95.7%
Commercial Vehicles 2 4.3%
Total 46
TYPE OF VEHICLE # ACC %
Winter (Dec-Feb) 14
Total 35
40.0%
Spring (Mar-May) 5 14.3%
Summer (Jun-Aug) 5 14.3%
Fall (Sep-Nov)11 31.4%
TIME OF YEAR # ACC %
2014 2015 2016
0
11
0
6
5
0
13
0
7
6
1
11
0
8
2
REMARKS:All Accidents
%
DATE:7/30/2019
ROUTE:Trumansburg Rd LOCATION:Trumansburg Rd Corridor
MUNICIPALITY:Town of Ithaca COUNTY:Thompkins
REFERENCE MARKERS / NODESTIME PERIOD COVERED: 1/1/2014 12/31/2016 - -
HSA Software 3.0
DATE TIME#VEHICLESACC. SEVERI TYLIGHT CONDROAD CHARSURFACEWEATHERACCIDENT DESCRIPTIONPage 1 of 2DETAILS OF ACCIDENT HISTORYNo.CONTRIB.FACTORS TYPEKEY #Trumansburg RdTrumansburg Rd CorridorTown of Ithaca ThompkinsROUTE NUMBER/STREET NAME:LOCATION:MUNICIPALITY:COUNTY:REFERENCE MARKERS / NODES: - 1/1/201412/31/201636PERIOD STUDIED: FROM: TO: MONTHSTrumansburg Cor.ETC7/30/2019CASE No.FILE:BY:DATE:12/2/2016 11:53 2OvtkPDO 1 1 2 3 4 19 13 Veh 1 struck Veh 2 while attempting to pass1110/6/2015 4:37 1AnmlPDO 4 1 1 1 61 collision with deer2211/17/2016 8:54 2LtrnPDO 1 1 1 2 7 18 Veh 1 struck Veh 2 while exiting driveway3311/6/2016 22:16 1FixON/R 5 1 1 1 19 21 Veh 1 struck object adjacent to road4410/20/2016 18:55 1AnmlINJ 5 1 1 1 61 collision with deer5510/5/2016 10:55 2RendPDO 1 1 1 1 4 9 19 Veh 1 struck Veh 2 while stopped at work zone666/28/2016 5:56 1AnmlPDO 2 1 1 2 61 collision with deer776/21/2016 7:48 1OthrPDO 1 1 1 1 4 19 collision with embankment/ditch887/24/2015 2:17 1OthrN/R 5 1 1 1 4 19 collision with embankment/ditch9910/13/2015 19:57 2RendPDO 5 1 1 1 4 9 Veh 1 struck Veh 2 while turning into driveway10101/13/2016 17:30 1AnmlPDO 5 1 1 1 61 collision with deer111111/21/2014 7:55 2RendN/R 1 1 4 4 9 66 Veh 1 struck Veh 2 while turning into driveway - snow/ice12121/27/2016 12:11 2RendPDO 1 1 2 4 4 19 9 Veh 1 struck Veh 2 while turning into driveway131312/25/2015 22:15 1AnmlPDO 5 1 1 1 61 collision with deer141412/8/2015 12:00 1AnmlN/R 1 1 1 1 61 collision with deer151510/15/2015 12:22 2RtrnN/R 1 1 1 1 4 7 18 Veh 1 struck Veh 2 while entering roadway16167/11/2015 12:18 1OthrPDO 1 1 1 1 4 19 collision with embankment/ditch17175/7/2015 15:16 2RendPDO 1 1 1 1 4 9 19 Veh 1 struck Veh 2 while turning into driveway181810/31/2016 14:18 1OthrN/R 1 1 1 2 4 19 collision with embankment/ditch19193/23/2015 3:35 1AnmlPDO 5 1 2 2 61 collision with deer20202/28/2015 12:22 1AnmlN/R 1 1 1 1 61 collision with deer21212/16/2015 9:20 1OthrPDO 1 1 4 2 19 5 collision with embankment/ditch2222HSA Software 3.0
Northbound
Trumansburg Rd
Trumansburg Rd
13
6 10 12 18
16
32
1
A
14 11 5
A
2 7 20
29
4
8 9
17 19 22
30
3
15
21
SYMBOLS MANNER OF COLLISION
MOVING VEHICLE
TURNING VEHICLE
BACKING VEHICLE
PARKED VEHICLE
RECORD NUMBER
A ANIMAL
PEDESTRIAN
BICYCLIST
FIXED OBJECT
P
B
REAR END
OVERTAKE
OUT OF CONTROL
LEFT TURN
LEFT TURN
HEAD ON
RIGHT TURN
RIGHT TURN
RIGHT ANGLE
SIDE SWIPEFatal999
COLLISION DIAGRAM
MUNICIPALITY:Town of Ithaca COUNTY:Thompkins
INTERSECTION:Trumansburg Rd
PERIOD:3 MONTHS0 FROM 1/1/2014 TO 12/31/2016
FILE:Trumansburg Cor.
YEARS BY:ETC DATE:7/30/2019
CASE # :
Key Number =
HSA Software 3.0
REFERENCE MARKERS / NODES:
years3.0
veh./day )8350
total accidents in35
ACCIDENT RATE
(( 1,000,000 ))*
(365 days/yr.)*years )3.0(*(
=3.19
1/1/2014 12/31/2016
All Accidents
Segment
Intersection
accidents per million vehicle miles
*(1.2 miles)
-
(Statewide average rate )
=
=
ACCIDENT RATE CALCULATIONS
TIME PERIOD:
HSA Software 3.0
ROUTE:Trumansburg Rd
LOCATION:Trumansburg Rd Corridor
REMARKS:
-
DATE TIME#VEHICLESACC. SEVERI TYLIGHT CONDROAD CHARSURFACEWEATHERACCIDENT DESCRIPTIONPage 2 of 2DETAILS OF ACCIDENT HISTORYNo.CONTRIB.FACTORS TYPEKEY #Trumansburg RdTrumansburg Rd CorridorTown of Ithaca ThompkinsROUTE NUMBER/STREET NAME:LOCATION:MUNICIPALITY:COUNTY:REFERENCE MARKERS / NODES: - 1/1/201412/31/201636PERIOD STUDIED: FROM: TO: MONTHSTrumansburg Cor.ETC7/30/2019CASE No.FILE:BY:DATE:3/15/2016 6:37 1AnmlPDO 5 1 1 1 61 collision with deer232312/8/2015 12:00 1AnmlN/R 1 1 1 1 61 collision with deer24241/1/2015 6:25 1AnmlN/R 5 1 1 1 61 collision with deer252512/26/2014 22:00 1AnmlPDO 5 1 1 1 61 collision with deer262612/21/2014 19:45 1AnmlPDO 5 1 1 2 61 collision with deer272710/30/2014 19:30 1AnmlPDO 5 1 1 2 61 collision with animal28289/1/2014 20:15 3RtrnPDO 4 1 1 1 4 7 18 Veh 1 struck Veh 2 while entering roadway29298/5/2014 10:16 1OthrN/R 1 1 1 1 4 19 collision with embankment/ditch30305/11/2014 20:24 1AnmlN/R 3 1 1 1 61 collision with deer31314/4/2014 11:47 2OvtkN/R 1 1 1 2 13 Veh 1 struck Veh 2 while turning into driveway32322/23/2014 3:03 1AnmlPDO 5 1 1 1 61 collision with deer33331/21/2014 21:58 1AnmlPDO 5 1 2 4 61 collision with deer34341/17/2014 18:00 1AnmlN/R 5 1 1 1 61 collision with deer3535HSA Software 3.0
APPENDIX G
Pedestrian Generator Checklist
NYSDOT Pedestrian Generator Checklist
PEDESTRIAN GENERATOR CHECKLIST
PIN:3756.21 Project Name:NYS Route 96 / Trumansburg Road Pedestrian Corridor Study
Project
Location:NYS Route 96 / Trumansburg Road, Ithaca, NY
Note: The term Agenerator@ in this document refers to both pedestrian generators (where pedestrians
originate) and destinations (where pedestrians travel to).
A check of” yes” indicates a potential need to accommodate pedestrians and coordination with the Regional
Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator is necessary during project scoping. Answers to the following questions
should be checked with the local municipality to ensure accuracy.
1.Is there an existing or planned sidewalk, trail, or pedestrian-crossing facility?YES□ NO□
2.Are there bus stops, transit stations or depots/terminals located in or within 800
m of the project area?
YES□ NO□
3.Is there more than occasional pedestrian activity? Evidence of pedestrian
activity may include a worn path.
YES□ NO□
4.Are there existing or approved plans for generators of pedestrian activity in or
within 800m of the project that promote or have the potential to promote
pedestrian traffic in the project area, such as schools, parks, playgrounds,
places of employment, places of worship, post offices, municipal buildings,
restaurants, shopping centers, or other commercial areas, or shared-use paths?
YES□NO□
5.Are there existing or approved plans for seasonal generators of pedestrian
activity in or within 800 m of the project that promote or have the potential to
promote pedestrian traffic in the project area, such as ski resorts, state parks,
camps, amusement parks?
YES□ NO□
6.Is the project located in a residential area within 800 m of existing or planned
pedestrian generators such as those listed in 4 above?
YES□ NO□
7.From record plans, were pedestrian facilities removed during a previous highway
reconstruction project?
YES□ NO□
8.Did a study of secondary impacts indicate that the project promotes or is likely to
promote commercial and/or residential development within the intended life cycle
of the project?
YES□ NO□
9.Does the community’s comprehensive plan call for development of pedestrian
facilities in the area?
YES□ NO□
10.Based on the ability of students to walk and bicycle to school, would the project
benefit from engineering measures under the Safe-Routes-To-School program?
Eligible infrastructure-related improvements must be within a 3.2 km radius of
the project.
YES□ NO□
Note: This checklist should be revisited due to a project delay or if site conditions or local planning changes
during the project development process.
Comments:
Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator:
Project Designer:
www.bartonandloguidice.com