100 Great Meadow Road

Wethersfield, Connecticut 06109

tel: 860 529-7615

fax: 860 529-8102

April 21, 2004

Mr. Jeffrey S. Baker, Esq.

Young, Sommer, Ward, Ritzenberg, Baker &. Moore, LLC

Executive Woods

Five Palisades Drive

Albany, NY 12205

Subject: Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth

Dear Mr. Baker:

At your request CDM has evaluated the intersection improvements associated with the Widewaters Commons development proposed in the Town of Kinderhook, NY.

We have reviewed information you have supplied us including the following:

Section 2.0 Environmental Setting, Potential Significant Adverse Impacts, Mitigation and Alternatives, Widewaters Commons Shopping Center, Kinderhook, Columbia County, New York, Supplemental Draft Environmental lmpact Statement (SDEIS), dated July 2, 2003, prepared by The Widewaters Group.

Plan Sheet C-3, Layout Plan, dated November 2, 200l, last revised 12/11/03, prepared by The Widewaters Group.

Plan Sheet C-12, Rte 9H/Rte 9 Roundabout Plan, dated June 25, 2003, prepared by The Widewaters Group.

Layout Sheet, Widewaters Commons Kinderhook Roundabout, dated March 17, 2004, prepared by The Widewaters Group.

Based upon our review of the information, we provide the following comments:

l. The applicant states in The SDEIS that project traffic volumes indicate the need for a two-lane roundabout in the not to distant future. The applicant provided a proposed partial two-lane roundabout layout, dated March 17, 2004. In general, a multi-lane roundabout is less safe than a single lane roundabout, and the nature of the proposed five-lwg intersection would further confuse drivers.

2. The designer has provided a unique configuration to provide for future capacity. This configuration provides for a two lane roundabout for only one of the five approaches. Considering the closely balance volumes of the through movements at this intersection, there is skepticism that the proposed configuration is adequate. The Town should be provided with the RODEL output showing that the proposed layout is adequate for project and network peak volumes. The designer should provide the Town with information regarding the capacity analysis for this proposal to ensure the needs of all approaches are met. This analysis should be analyzed under the peak traffic hours for a.m. and p m. The concern for the Town is that if a mu1ti-lane approach is required for other approaches the geometry of the roundabout may not function properly. For example, the northbound movement for Route 9 through the roundabout has high volumes and will likely necessitate a multi-lane approach in the future. If the roundabout requires a two-lane approach for Route 9 northbound, the roundabout would need to be shifted further to the west to avoid the need to acquire property.

3. Thc FHWA Roundabout An informational Guide states that it is desirable to equally space the angles between entry legs of a roundabout. Equal leg spacing is critical for optimal separation between successive entries and exits the proposed roundabout approaches are not equally spaced, which will decrease safety and have a negative effect of the operation of the roundabout. In addition, the tight geometry of the proposed 5-leg roundabout would make it difficult to provide a multi-lane approach from Route 9 northbound while maintaining the movement to State Farm Road.

4. Multi-lane roundabout pavement markings and signing are critical for safe operation. The final design should include detailed information on the location of these.

5. The proposed vehicle turning movements for the two-1ane roundabout are a concern. The SDEIS states that the roundabout has been designed to accommodate a WB-67 tractor trailer. Use of a WB-67 design vehicle for a roundabout is appropriate However, to demonstrate the proper functioning of the roundabout the designer shou1d provide the Town with diagrams showing the proposed vehicle paths for passenger, bus, and WB-67 vehicles.

6. The applicant should further discuss the impact of on-going studies pertaining to ADA requirements for roundabouts and how the proposed pedestrian signals would impact the capacity of the intersection In addition, due to the possibility of an ADA

requirement fox providing pedestrian signalization for roundabouts, the Town may want to require an agreement for the developer to fund the installation in the future.

7. Studies have shown that multi-lane roundabouts are less safe than single lane roundabouts for pedestrians and bicycles. The applicant should discuss the need for a dedicated bike lane on the roundabout.

8. Multi-lane roundabouts have mare accidents than single lane roundabouts. A critical component in helping to reduce accidents is a driver’s education and information program. The Town may consider having the applicant develop a program to present roundabout driving techniques to the potential drivers in the area. The users of the roundabout come from a geographically diverse area and a significant effort would be required to advise and inform the peep.

9. The SDEIS correctly discusses the importance of providing illumination for a roundabout. Consideration should be made for maintenance and operational costs associated with this requirement in addition, illumination should be designed in accordance with local and state regulations. The planning agency may want to consider a requirement for aesthetic light fixtures.

10. While the SDEIS discussed snow removal, the unusual configuration of the proposed roundabout in combination with the turning movement limitations previously discussed, will make maintenance operations difficu1t. The applicant should verify NYSDOT maintenance is satisfied with the multi-lane roundabout.

11. While multi-lane roundabouts can be an acceptable intersection alignment; however, they are not the best choice for every intersection. An example of this is the five leg multi-lane roundabout in Towson, Maryland. Comparison of accidents before and after construction of the roundabout revealed a reduction in the number of serious accidents, however, overall accidents increased by nearly 400%.

In conclusion, concerns such as required lane capacity, vehicle movements, pedestrian and bicycle safety, and driver confusion are attributes which can lead to operational fai1ure of a multi-lane roundabout intersection. The proposed two-lane, five leg roundabout design does not address these concerns.

* * *