Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth

TO:	Jeff Baker Young Sommer … LLC
FROM:	R. Mark Dempf, PE Keri Pyke, PE, PTOE Vollmer Associates LLP
DATE:	September 15, 2003
RE:	Widewaters Commons DEIS, Kinderhook, NY

We have reviewed the traffic sections of the Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS) and the traffic study prepared by The Sear-Brown Group. We have the following comments:

1. Because the Town is responsible for approving the project, the Proponent should provide an AM peak hour analysis of the roundabout operations. The Town should have assurances that the proposed mitigation will work in all peak conditions, not just those of the development. The AM peak hour frequently has a different directional distribution of traffic than the PM peak hour or Saturday peak hour. During the AM peak hour, it is more likely that the roundabout operation, if constrained, could impact school bus traffic. The traffic count data provided in the appendices that was collected by New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) should not be considered a comprehensive data set. The proponent should collect new AM peak hour traffic data to perform the analysis. *

2. The capacity analysis shows the level of service (LOS) and delay based upon the Percentile Delay Method, which is not consistent with the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). The Proponent should provide the capacity analysis computer printouts of the HCM reports from Synchro, which provide LOS and delay based on Webster’s Method, and is consistent with the methodology of the HCM. This can be important because the Percentile Delay Method often shows results that are much better than those of Webster’s Delay Method. Comparing the Percentile Delay method results to the thresholds in the HCM is an apples-to-oranges comparison. The thresholds shown in the HCM are based upon Webster’s Method and should only be applied to results computed using that method.

3. NYSDOT’s standard software package for analyzing roundabouts is Rodel. No Rodel output data were provided . The proponent should analyze the roundabout using the standard software and provide the output data for review.

4. The traffic study and SDEIS prepared by the proponent indicate that the single-lane roundabout will operate under constrained conditions in the future. Based upon the analysis, we feel it would be appropriate for the Proponent to provide for a right-of-way reservation so that the roundabout could be expanded to a two-lane configuration in the future if necessary. **

5. Since NYSDOT views the construction of the roundabout as a somewhat "experimental" mitigation method, we recommend that the applicant perform a post-construction study to evaluate operations at the roundabout. The study should be initiated two years after the construction is complete. The study should include new traffic counts, capacity analysis, and a comparison of the actual results to those of the original study. The post-implementation study should also include a future conditions analysis with volumes grown to a 20-year planning horizon, to determine the life span of the single-lane roundabout. The study should include accident analysis from the inception of the roundabout in order to determine whether the frequency and severity of accidents at the intersection have decreased.

6. The proponent should provide a sensitivity analysis of the capacity of the site driveway. If the driveway is at capacity, does this cause the roundabout to fail or does it shorten the life span of the single-lane roundabout?

7. NYSDOT has developed guidelines for designing a roundabout that are based on the FHWA guidelines. The proponent should utilize these guidelines wherever possible in the design of the roundabout. If conditions dictate a departure from the guidelines, the proponent should explain the reason for the variation and the potential consequences of the variation, such as impacts to motorist and pedestrian safety, capacity, and delay.

* Since this report was written, the site plan was approved. NO AM PEAK hour analysis of the roundabout operations was required by the Town of Widewaters.

Red highlighting was added to this document for emphasis. It is not on the original document provided by Vollmer Associates.

KINDERHOOK-An appearance by Marco Marzocchi, General Counsel for The Widewaters Group, at the Town Board's regular monthly meeting on Monday, February 9, led some town residents to wonder if he was trying to influence a decision which belongs to the Planning Board.

       But Supervisor Doug McGivney made it clear that Mr. Marzocchi had been invited by Councilman Keith Stack, and Mr. Marzocchi himself said his purpose in coming was "to make sure the Board was well-informed and would share information with the [Planning] Board, particularly with regard to the DOT {Department of Transportation] position on the roundabout."
       Widewaters, a Syracuse real estate developer, hopes to build an open-air shopping mall anchored by a Hannaford's supermarket at the intersection of Routes 9 and 9H with State Farm Road.
       The DOT had found the location unsuitable for additional curb cuts when Samascott Orchards sought to build a farm stand there several years ago, but state highway engineers settled on a roundabout, or traffic circle, as a way of dealing with traffic generated by the proposed supermarket complex.
       Many town residents have questioned the safety and efficiency of a roundabout in an area with heavy pedestrian and bus traffic from Ichabod Crane Central School, located a few hundred yards from the intersection. "I foresee a horrendous mess and a very dangerous mess," said one resident during Monday's meeting.
       As part of his presentation, Mr. Marzocchi furnished board members with a January 22, 2004 memorandum from Howard McCulloch of the Roundabout Design Unit in DOT's Albany office. In summation, the memo says the "Unit feels that this intersection is a very good location for a roundabout."
       And, as Mr. Marzocchi was quick to point out, the memorandum goes on to say that "Regardless of the status on the business development at this site, we feel that the replacement of the existing intersection with a roundabout will provide a much safer and more efficient intersection."
       Town Supervisor Douglas McGivney and Deputy Supervisor Francis Vecellio asked Mr. Marzocchi whether DOT engineers had considered any alternative solutions.
       "The public is looking for a better explanation of why alternatives won't work," said Mr. Vecellio. "There are other options, like two simple intersections. What we've gotten from DOT is 'because we said so'."
       Mr. McGivney said no less than four letters seeking further information from DOT engineers had gone unanswered. "Not once was a roundabout mentioned by the DOT for that intersection," said Mr. McGivney. "It came up after Widewaters asked for 3 curb cuts."
       Mr. McGivney said he would like to see whatever design standards have been adopted by the DOT, if any; and he asked Mr. Marzocchi if he could provide any assistance in getting the town a copy of them.
       Later in the meeting, Mr. Marzocchi's request under the state's Freedom of Information Law for all notes and memorandums from a meeting between town planning officials and officials from the DOT was denied by the Town Board as "too broad" in scope. He had been turned down previously by the Planning Board.
       Robert Freeman, executive director of the Committee on Open Government, said "statistical or factual information is public," but the "Open Meeting Law applies only if a quorum of a government body was present." The meeting from which Mr. Marzocchi sought to retrieve notes included only two members of the Planning Board, Edwin Simonsen and Gerry Minot-Scheuermann, along with planning and zoning attorney Marc Gerstman; engineers Jim Green and Shelly Johnston; and Howard McCulloch and Richard Schell of the Department of Transportation.
       Mr. Simonsen said (he) didn't have a clue what Mr. Marzocchi expected to find in the notes. "I wonder what he thinks is there," said Mr. Simonsen. "The meeting was very cordial." Mr. Marzocchi said the board's resistance in itself made him suspect there was "something there to hide."
       Allen Schaefer of Kinderhook Neighbors for Good Growth , a group strongly opposing the development, characterized Mr. Marzocchi's appearance at the Town Board meeting as "rather unorthodox," saying "It looks like he's putting pressure on the Town Board to influence the Planning Board." Mr. Marzocchi ridiculed the suggestion.
       When asked following the meeting whether allowing the project to go forward was the Planning Board's call, Planning Board Chairman Edwin Simonsen said, "It sure is."
       "I don't think we've taken a position on the roundabout," said Mr. Simonsen. "We've yet to adequately discuss the whole issue of the roundabout. We will look in more detail as we look at the site plan."
       Complicating the issue, Mr. Simonsen said, is an application for a Dunkin' Donuts shop in the narrow point of land between Routes 9 and 9H on the south side of the intersection or the proposed roundabout.
       "It's going to introduce to that general area a greater number of turns and slower stopping activity," said Mr. Simonsen. "We've been fortunate to have a business there that has a very low traffic volume."
       During his presentation, Mr. Marzocchi suggested a joint meeting between the Planning Board and the Town Board, but Mr. Simonsen questioned the value of such a meeting.
       "Is it them you want to get together, or do you want to present it to the public?" said Mr. Simonsen.
       Both Mr. Marzocchi and former Town Board member Ken Wengler reminded the board that the location is zoned for business use. "It's this board that zoned the property B1 and extended the B1 zone," said Mr. Marzocchi. "You're the policy makers."
       Mr. Wengler, who has criticized the board in the past for what he sees as an anti-commercial bias, said "It's commercial, and he has a right to develop it."
       Pointing out that Stewart's Shops had paid $500,000 for a two-acre lot a few hundred yards down the road and that the 19 acres on which Widewaters proposes to build had a price tag of $900,000, Mr. Simonsen said "It certainly appears that there is a financial incentive in wanting to place [the Widewaters development] at that location."
       Mr. Simonsen said the Planning Board now has "the 'draft' Final Draft Environmental Impact Statement prepared by Widewaters consultants. "What we are going to have to do," he said, "is to work through the document and modify where appropriate so we can stand behind it." He said he expected to schedule a public hearing on the site plan "at the beginning of March."

But there are other issues facing the project, he cautioned, not the least of which is the applicant's contentious proposal for a roundabout at the 9/9H split.
       The state Department of Transportation had said Widewaters' plan for adding three access points to the current intersection would be too dangerous.
       The developer then proposed doing away with traffic lights at 9 and 9H and State Farm Road to make way for a roundabout that it believes would mitigate traffic concerns.
       That has people in the community nervous, and planners have hired a traffic consultant to review the roundabout design and the data provided by Widewaters' traffic people.
       Mr. Simonsen, however, said the state might consider alternatives to the roundabout.
       "I think DOT, at least privately, has expressed a willingness to consider something other than a roundabout at that intersection," he said Friday.
       He and plaza opponents have been frustrated by DOT's failure to include town officials in conversations with Widewaters about traffic mitigation plans.
       Mr. Simonsen also points out the owners of the proposed building site, the Samascott family, were denied permission by DOT to put in curb cuts when the fruit farmers were looking into building a farm stand at the same property.
       Whatever the DOT decides with regard to Widewaters, the Planning Board is waiting for results from its traffic consultant to make its own determination.
       And the Planning Board, as the lead agency for the project, decides whether the applicant wins approval for its proposal for intersection improvements.

August 8, 2003 - The Independent

Planner faults circle logic

By: RICHARD ROTH

08/08/2003

EXCERPTS:

KINDERHOOK--A member of the town Planning Board has leveled detailed technical criticisms of a roundabout proposed for the intersection of Routes 9 and 9H, State Farm Road, a key part of the proposed $10 million Widewaters shopping plaza.

       "I think this whole thing is being treated too lightly," said Planning Board member Charles Shattenkirk, speaking at an informational meeting at North Pointe Cultural Center on Wednesday evening, August 16.
       His comments were directed at Richard Dillmann, Assistant Regional Traffic Engineer with the New York State Department of Transportation (DOT); and Gordon Stansbury and William Holthoff of Sear Brown, an engineering and planning consulting firm employed by the Widewaters Group.
       Taking the floor after town residents were given an opportunity to confront the engineers with their comments and questions at the meeting, Mr. Shattenkirk began by telling the consultants their preliminary plan contains significant inaccuracies.
       "This is not a circle, it's an oval," he said, suggesting that the consultants had intentionally elongated the traffic pattern because the state-owned right-of-way is not sufficient to accommodate the 150-foot roundabout the consulting firm has proposed.
       In addition, he said, "You don't own enough property for the deceleration lanes."
       DOT officials have said that the right-of-way is sufficient, but scale drawings have not yet been filed. Sear Brown engineer William Holthoff, when pressed for an explanation, said a strip of land would be carved out of the property owned by Widewaters, the developer, if necessary.
       Mr. Shattenkirk directed several comments to the the state DOT engineer, Mr. Dillmann, saying that both Routes 9 and 9H are "on the federal network." Because of that, he said, the state would have to comply with federal highway standards on such features as raised traffic islands, curbing, and proper handicap accessibility.
       A federal regulation the DOT plan overlooks completely, he said, requires roads intersecting a roundabout to "enter at equal angles." While the entrances for Routes 9 and 9H are almost immediately adjacent on the south side of the roundabout as drawn, the angle separating Route 9 to the north and the proposed shopping center entrance to the east is greater than 90 degrees.
       Mr. Dillmann acknowledged that federal regulations apply but did not directly address Mr. Shattenkirk's comments.
       In response to another question from Mr. Shattenkirk, Mr. Dillmann said the department's regional traffic engineer would be responsible for reviewing the the proposal.
       Planning Board Chairman Ed Simonsen said he wanted town residents to know that decisions are not being made at the local level in any case.
       "Praise or blame is not for the Planning Board or the Town Board," said Mr. Simonsen. "We have not been part of the process. That's a real sore point, and it's not going to go away."
       Shelley Johnston of Creighton Manning Engineering, a firm employed by the Town of Kinderhook, asked the Sear Brown and DOT engineers to provide a more detailed plan as soon as possible so that its impact on adjacent property owners could be assessed.
       "It would be helpful to have a one-half-mile radius from the roundabout," said Ms. Johnston. "We need to look at it more as a system, not just one intersection.
       The engineers have said private driveways in the immediate vicinity will have to be modified, and they anticipate a reduction in the speed limit to 35 mph on Routes 9 and 9H beginning approximately half a mile from the roundabout in either direction.
       Numerous members of the audience offered their opinions on the roundabout, with some questioning whether it meets the goals of the town's comprehensive plan, which says the town's rural, agricultural character should be maintained. Others expressed concerns about traffic safety, with the engineers replying that accident rates typically go down "50 to 60%" after roundabouts replace traffic lights.
       The problem of pedestrian crossings was brought up several times. Tunnels are not a satisfactory solution, according to the engineers, because people are afraid to use them; and overhead bridges would be impractical because of the ramp length required to make them handicap accessible.
       The original Widewaters proposal called for access through the traffic lights currently operating at the 9-9H intersection. But the DOT determined that lights were impractical for a 5-legged intersection and proposed building a roundabout instead.
       Copies of the preliminary roundabout plan are available for inspection at the Kinderhook Town Hall and at the Kinderhook Memorial and Valatie Libraries.
       The meeting Wednesday was yet another step in a long process leading to submission by the developer of a formal environmental impact statement. The project cannot proceed without an approved impact statement.

        Drawings included in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement prepared by the company (Widewaters) do not specify measurements. Gordon Stansbury of Sear, Brown, an engineering firm that was consulted on the project, told the audience at a hearing last month that the roundabout would be 140 feet in diameter. A "truck apron" on the center island would provide extra room for trucks and buses to negotiate the circle.
       The matter is entirely up to the Town of Kinderhook and the Department of Transportation, according to Dave Chapman of the Columbia County Traffic Safety Board. "There are no county roads in that area," said Mr. Chapman.
       The Town Board had no immediate comment on issues brought up at the meeting. The approval process is in the hands of the Town Planning Board, which must make its determination based on planning and environmental concerns.

©The Independent 2004

December 3, 2002 - The Independent

DOT rethinks plaza; builder upbeat now

By MATTHEW SHEEHEY

12/03/2002

NIVERVILLE--The state engineer who called the Widewaters Group proposal "unconscionable" now says changes to Routes 9/9H can make it work.

      William FitzPatrick, regional traffic engineer with the Department of Transportation, wrote to the plaza developer last month about initiatives that he says would make the roads safe for three curb cuts.
      Those curb cuts would bring cars in and out of the $10 million shopping center Widewaters wants to build across from the Four Brothers restaurant.
      But the Kinderhook Planning Board and many town residents have expressed concern that putting a busy supermarket and shops at the terminus of Route 9H threatens the safety of motorists and of students at nearby Ichabod Crane.
      Those anxieties were confirmed in a DOT letter to the applicant in early October, when Mr. FitzPatrick said adding a new leg to the four-legged intersection between two secondary driveways is too dangerous a concept.
      The engineer, however, tells Widewaters in a November 13 letter that further talks with the firm's traffic consultant show that two alternatives to the current 9/9H design could create a safe environment for the plaza.
      "Either alternative will satisfactorily mitigate the potential traffic impacts of the project as currently proposed," says Mr. FitzPatrick.
      The first plan calls for relocation of a portion of Route 9 northbound to Keegan Road and reconfiguration of the traffic signal at the plaza site.
      Mr. FitzPatrick writes that access points for the Hannaford Bros. market and the other commercial space would include a signalized access to 9/9H and State Farm Road.
      He says the plan also allows for a "right-in-only drive" to the north of the light and a "right-out-only drive" to the south by the McDonald's restaurant.

The second option DOT would apparently consider is construction of a roundabout at the 9/9H and State Farm Road intersection to accommodate "multiple legs, including the primary access to the proposed development."
      The roundabout, adds Mr. FitzPatrick, would also provide for the right-in and right-out points on either end of the 19-acre field Widewaters hopes to buy and build on.
      The developer, despite claims last week that it might reconsider its desire to set up shop here due to difficulties with the town, is upbeat about its plan.
      And Widewaters believes DOT will move promptly to upgrade the intersection.
      "From Day One, we've been willing to work with the DOT to come up with a plan that is mutually acceptable," says Marco Marzocchi, a company representative.
      He was a regular this year at Planning Board meetings and special workshops, where he tired to show how his firm plans to mitigate possible negative impacts.

But the board decided late last month that Widewaters must submit a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement to address recently discovered concerns, including differences in traffic studies and data used by DOT and the applicant.
      The DOT's November 13 letter, however, was not sent along to the Planning Board.
      "It's certainly a marked change with respect to their position on the project," says board Chairman Ed Simonsen, whose board is the lead agency for the project review.
      He says Mr. Marzocchi called the board's engineer for Widewaters review matters, Jim Green, to inform him of the DOT's most recent opinion on the traffic scheme.
      DOT never called town officials about it.
      "It doesn't appear we're being included in this decision-making process," says Mr. Simonsen, who was expecting a fax of the one- page letter yesterday from Mr. Green.
      The DOT's alternatives for the 9/9H intersection pose problems, he says, that need to be considered by town planners during the project review.
      Mr. Simonsen worries the right-in access does not give motorists enough time to slow down as they drive south on 9 towards the plaza.
      And he's troubled by the safety implications of added lanes on the major routes, which are the main routes taken by residents headed to Rensselaer County.
      "It becomes a bigger issue than just this project when we start talking about rerouting 9 and adding a roundabout... How can we adequately evaluate it?" asks Mr. Simonsen.
      He also spoke recently with business owners in the area of Keegan Road about their concerns for the future should the DOT decide to go through with the changes.
      The merchants agreed to sit down for a meeting with Mr. Simonsen, Kinderhook Supervisor Doug McGivney, and the mayors of Kinderhook and Valatie villages, to find out more from the DOT engineers and let them know their views.
      Mr. FitzPatrick, however, has yet to return the Planning Board's call on the matter.
      Opponents of the project are actively trying to block approval of the new supermarket and shops for assorted reasons, including the threat to traffic safety and the possibility building on the site will damage water quality.
      But the Widewaters Group seems determined to stick around, and it would like to bring in earthmovers and construction crews as soon as possible.
      "We've discussed timing with DOT and we've been assured by them that the timing of highway improvements will not interfere with our project in any way," says Mr. Marzocchi.

October 11, 2002 - The Independent

State DOT blasts K'hook plaza plan

By: MATTHEW SHEEHEY

10/11/2002

NIVERVILLE--A state Department of Transportation engineer says the Widewaters Group's plan for the intersection of Routes 9/9H is "unconscionable."

      William FitzPatrick, the DOT regional traffic engineer in Poughkeepsie, made the comment in reference to the developer's intention to add another leg to the four-legged intersection to serve its proposed $10 million shopping plaza.
      The 19-acre building site, which is just up the road from Ichabod Crane's main campus and McDonald's, would get a total of 3 access points under the Widewaters plan.
      But Mr. FitzPatrick, in a letter sent to the applicant October 2, says his department finds that proposal "unacceptable in concept and in detail" because it compromises public safety and disrupts the flow of traffic.
      "As you are aware, the existing geometry of the Route 9/9H/State Farm Road intersection is less than desirable. Adding the proposed access drive to this intersection would be unconscionable," writes Mr. FitzPatrick.
      Those comments come as some relief to the citizens group that opposes the Widewaters proposal, Kinderhook Neighbors For Good Growth, and echo the concerns of the chairman of the Kinderhook Planning Board.
      Allen Schaefer of the neighbors group says the engineer's letter is good news for his cause. "According to our attorneys, this is the strongest letter they have ever seen from DOT. They're almost saying [Widewaters] has manipulated the numbers," he says.
      The DOT says building a one-way entrance to the plaza from Route 9 as well as a two-way access road south of the central driveway helps degrade air quality and "ultimately reduces the commercial viability of the corridor."
      That design, continues Mr. FitzPatrick, seems like an attempt by the developer to create an acceptable level of traffic at the five-legged intersection by providing alternative routes to and from the 500-space parking lot.
      "The sole purpose, as we see it, is to allow the numbers to work at the primary access point," he says, referring to the traffic study commissioned by Widewaters.
      Planning Board Chairman Ed Simonsen, who is leading the town's review of the project, believes some "major modifications" will have to be made it the developer wants to build its supermarket and shops at the site.
      Board members, residents and school officials have all expressed concern since Widewaters unveiled its proposal over the safety of pedestrians and motorists.
      "What [the DOT letter] does is affirm the concerns that some of us have had since the proposal was presented. It expresses the concerns of the school and the residents within and without the Town of Kinderhook," says Mr. Simonsen.
      He says Widewaters has not put enough thought into the shopping center's impacts on the entire county, which relies heavily on Routes 9/9H to travel north.
      "I'm so grateful that DOT has examined the project in the depth that they have," says Mr. Simonsen, who also seeks to safeguard access at existing businesses.
      Widewaters issued a statement yesterday, October 10, saying it welcomes the comments of the DOT regional traffic engineer and its looks forward to working with that office and officials "in resolving their concerns."
      "The Widewaters Group will continue to work closely with all the appropriate state and local officials to assure highway safety for the center's customers, employees, and all motorists and pedestrians who pass by the site," says the statement from the Utica area company.
      But Mr. FitzPatrick points out to the developer that the DOT is considering a move to re-route northbound traffic on Route 9 to Keegan Road, which Widewaters must consider if it wants to build its plaza at the intersection.
      The engineer also says the only proposal DOT will consider is one that uses a "single full movement access" from the development to the existing intersection.
      Mr. Schaefer says the Keegan Road initiative could take years to get off the ground, which should prompt Widewaters to look into alternative properties.
      "Maybe if it were a few miles up the road it wouldn't be so bad, but it's unsuitable. What we've complained about in the DEIS is that they haven't looked at alternative sites, which is required by law," says Mr. Schaefer.
      He's referring to the Widewaters preliminary draft environmental impact statement, which seeks to show how the firm will mitigate impacts on everything from vehicle and foot traffic to the town's natural resources and scenery.
      That document is the subject of a public hearing Tuesday, October 15, at 7 p.m. at the North Pointe center on Route 9 just north of the Village of Kinderhook square.
      Mr. Schaefer's group, Kinderhook Neighbors For Good Growth, filed a protest with the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding placement of the plaza's septic system.
      The Planning Board decided that action would suspend the hearing, but Widewaters took the town to court, prompting officials to go ahead with the session Tuesday.
      "The purpose of the hearing is to gather comment from community members on the DEIS. It's not a venue for expressing your desire to have or not have Widewaters develop this parcel," says Mr. Simonsen.
      In the meantime, Widewaters has work to do to satisfy the DOT, which points out the firm based its study on volumes of traffic measured on two days when classes were not in session at Ichabod Crane.
      The traffic study also fails to consider future development that might come before the Kinderhook Planning Board and other issues, says the DOT.
      "We would also suggest that your consultant meet one on one with our engineer before putting pencil to paper so that we may guide you in your efforts," says Mr. FitzPatrick.