Hamlet of Chappaqua, Town of New Castle, NY · However, WSP also prepared VISSIM models for the Downtown Hamlet traffic network while investigating an alternative “triangular roundabout”

Hamlet of Chappaqua, Town of New Castle, NY Streetscape & Infrastructure

Improvement Project

Downtown Chappaqua Interim and Permanent Improvements at

The King Street (NY 120) and North / South Greeley Avenue Intersection

&

The Quaker Road (NY 120) and South Greeley Avenue Intersection

Technical Memorandum

Prepared by:

February 8, 2016

Downtown Chappaqua Interim and Permanent Improvements Traffic Analysis Technical Memorandum

February 8, 2016

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK


February 8, 2016

Page | 1

Figure 1 – Key Study Corridor Map


February 8, 2016

Page | 2

I. Introduction

This memorandum has been prepared at the request of the NYSDOT Region 8 Traffic & Safety Group (herein referred to as “DOT Traffic and Safety” or “DOT”) as follow-up to an October 2, 2015 traffic meeting held at Town of New Castle Town Hall. The Town of New Castle (known as “TONC” or “the Town”) and WSP, the Town’s consultant, requested this meeting to discuss much needed improvements at two key intersections within the Chappaqua Commercial Hamlet that are part of the Hamlet Streetscape and Infrastructure Improvement Project. These intersections are:

■ King Street, North / South Greeley Avenue, Lower King Street (also known as “King and Greeley” or “King / Greeley”); and

■ Quaker Road and South Greeley Avenue (also known as “Quaker and South Greeley”, “Quaker / South Greeley” or the “triangle”).

New York State Route 120 (herein referred to as “NY 120”) passes through both of these critical Hamlet intersections. Refer to the Key Study Corridor Graphic on Page 1.

Despite being a “State Highway” with the designation NY 120, the King Street – South Greeley Avenue – Quaker Road corridor hardly exhibits the characteristics of a State highway and in the case of the Chappaqua Hamlet, it is merely a mechanism to recognize NYSDOT jurisdiction. This segment of NY 120:

■ Has a speed limit of 30 MPH as it is within a bustling central business district in a Hamlet, surrounded by local government offices, other commercial and residential development;

■ Has a wealth of pedestrian traffic throughout the entire daytime – patrons of the Hamlet and commuters using the Metro North Railroad station;

■ Is subject to a mid-afternoon flux of students from Robert E. Bell Middle School, which is located in the Chappaqua Hamlet, who walk into the Downtown Hamlet via King Street and South Greeley Avenue, into the King / Greeley intersection, and cross the street where there is currently no crosswalk – as evidenced by eyewitness account and video footage (further discussed later in this memo); and

■ Has on-street parking on both sides of the street for a majority of the key corridor study area (see Figure 1).

The primary focus of the meeting was to convey the Town’s strong desire to install a Stop Sign on Westbound King Street at the King / Greeley intersection as part of the Town’s Hamlet Improvement Project. While the Town and WSP acknowledge that this would impede an otherwise “free-flow” movement, it is felt that the benefits heavily outweigh the detriments. This is fully examined throughout this memorandum.

Synchro models of the AM and PM Peak Hours of the Downtown Hamlet traffic network generally agree with the free-flow nature of the intersection; however, they cannot always account for the presence of traffic agents or emulate the confusion of an approaching driver. The introduction of a WB Stop Sign into the existing conditions models predicts higher levels of service (LOS) such as F in


February 8, 2016

Page | 3

the AM Peak and E in the PM Peak for the WB movement and overall intersection LOS F for both peak periods.

However, WSP also prepared VISSIM models for the Downtown Hamlet traffic network while investigating an alternative “triangular roundabout” intersection configuration at Quaker / South Greeley, discussed in a later part of this memorandum. It is important to note that Synchro is not fully capable of modeling such a configuration.

When reviewing the VISSIM results for the corridor, we immediately noticed a stark comparison to the previously completed Synchro models. While not traditionally utilized in traffic analysis, it was important to note that the results of SimTraffic output tend to side more with those of VISSIM. This is indicative of a discrepancy between not only Synchro and VISSIM, but Synchro and SimTraffic – both of which are made by Trafficware. VISSIM predicts LOS D for the WB movement and a favorable overall intersection LOS of B for the AM Peak and C for the PM Peak. This discrepancy was brought to the attention of DOT Traffic and Safety at the end of July 2015. WSP provided Synchro models for further DOT review. VISSIM models were displayed during the October 2, 2015 meeting.

Without traffic model agreement and considering the characteristics of NY 120 within the Chappaqua Hamlet, the Town of New Castle strongly urges the installation of an interim, “test-case” Stop Sign on the WB movement of King Street in order to truly investigate and understand real life, real-time impacts. The results of this investigation will be shared in close coordination with DOT Traffic and Safety to help determine whether or not a Stop Sign is warranted as part of the proposed permanent improvements at King / Greeley within the Hamlet Improvement Project.

Other important considerations discussed at the October 2, 2015 meeting which are also discussed in this memorandum include:

■ DOT’s request for an accident analysis to be performed within the affected portion of the NY 120 corridor (i.e. from the existing Quaker Road triangle to King and Greeley);

■ The potential for a roundabout installation at King / Greeley and whether or not space exists for such an alternative;

■ WSP’s planned approach to monitoring traffic conditions, should DOT approve the temporary stop sign installation;

■ DOT’s request for commitment from the TONC to provide a resolution regarding the agreed upon conditions and limited duration of the interim stop condition, should it be approved;

■ A request from the DOT for the Town to consider the conversion of North Greeley Avenue to a one-way northbound roadway from King Street to Maple Avenue; and

■ Permanent improvements at King / Greeley such as the removal of an existing slip lane and the addition of a NB right turn lane at King / Greeley, a crosswalk on the NB intersection leg, “State Law – Yield to Pedestrians” signs and other ancillary improvements

It should be noted that the meeting briefly touched on the possible conversion of Lower King Street from one-way westbound to two-way. This would introduce a traffic signal at King / Greeley. Both Synchro and VISSIM models were also prepared by WSP for this configuration and are available for


February 8, 2016

Page | 4

review; however, at this time the TONC is not pursuing a two-way Lower King Street as part of the Hamlet Improvement Project.

For comparison, this memo presents baseline existing and desired proposed conditions. Baseline existing conditions represent today’s roadway network configuration and traffic volumes while the proposed conditions explore the impacts of all improvements at King and Greeley and the “Triangular Roundabout.”

All information presented in this document can be readily supplemented and/or modified based upon input from the DOT. The improvements analyzed represent the Town’s desired configuration of the Downtown Hamlet as part of the overall Streetscape and Infrastructure Improvement Project.

II. Planning and Design Assumptions

The following are assumptions used in the development of this technical memorandum:

As is consistent with the Town’s approved design concept at King / Greeley, the northbound approach has been analyzed with two lanes – a through/left and a dedicated right turn bay – for the proposed conditions.

A growth rate of 0.5% for the first five years and 0.3% for the remaining years was assumed for future ETC+30 volumes (estimated time of completion plus 30 years). These growth rates can easily be modified in the traffic models to account for additional future growth as a result of the Town’s future demand analysis and other revitalization efforts currently under way.

Existing data was inputted into Synchro v8, a macro modeling software. Thus, delay and level of service (LOS) output for existing conditions is from Synchro v8. Because of the unique configuration of the proposed improvements at Quaker Road and South Greeley Avenue it was necessary to use VISSIM v7, a micro simulation program for the traffic analysis. Delay and LOS output from the proposed conditions is from VISSIM v7.

For both software packages, Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2010 methodology is used to determine delay and LOS.

Retention of a one-way westbound Lower King Street allows for all existing diagonal parking spaces to shift from the north to the south side of the street. This allows King Street (NY 120) to better align with Lower King Street, removing an alignment jog and improving safety conditions for both vehicles and pedestrians at this busy intersection.

III. Discrepancies between Traffic Modeling Software Packages

According to Trafficware, the manufacturer of the Synchro Studio Suite Package, there is a distinct difference between the analysis methodology for Synchro and SimTraffic. Though they are companion models, Synchro is designed to determine LOS and delays at a macro level while SimTraffic is designed to produce “real world” conditions at a microscopic level. Synchro is a reliable statistical model of intersection operations but does not account for spillback occurring due to insufficient capacity. SimTraffic tracks individual vehicles for operational measures of effectiveness (MOE), measures the full impact of queuing and blocking, and is considered more realistic by Trafficware. Synchro is typically used for high-level planning studies as a result of


February 8, 2016

Page | 5

these differences. While our investigations did not discover a direct comparison to VISSIM and Synchro, VISSIM is similar to SimTraffic in that it is considered a microscopic model which partly explains why the results for the VISSIM analysis more closely match the SimTraffic analysis results. Other studies have confirmed the similarities in VISSIM and SimTraffic results, particularly for low traffic volume situations (<4,000vph).

Amongst professionals, the use of multiple simulation tools is considered appropriate to determine accuracy, since each simulation model software uses its own unique algorithms to calculate MOE. In the case of the intersection of South Greeley Avenue and King Street, it is evident that two out of the three sets of results are relatively in agreement. All this suggests that the micro simulation models, SimTraffic and VISSIM, as opposed to the macroscopic model, Synchro, more accurately portray conditions at this intersection. Therefore, it is highly recommended that an interim installation or “test-case” of a Stop Sign be permitted to not only understand its true real world effect, but to further bring to light the validity of accepting the results of VISSIM vs Synchro, in non-traditional intersection configurations.

Refer to Appendix B for our findings related to the differences between traffic modeling software packages. These were previously provided to DOT Traffic and Safety in July 2015.

IV. Baseline Existing Conditions

In order to study various proposed traffic scenarios and operational configurations in the downtown Hamlet area, it was first necessary to gather and analyze information on the existing traffic conditions. In October 2013 (supplemented in June 2014), WSP performed existing manual intersection turning movement traffic counts at the following key intersections within the Hamlet within the study area of this memorandum:

■ King Street (NY 120) / Lower King Street / North & South Greeley Avenue (King and Greeley);

■ Quaker Road (NY 120) and South Greeley Avenue; and

■ Woodburn Avenue and South Greeley Avenue

While counts were also taken at several additional intersections within the overall project limits, this memorandum focuses primarily on the effects of proposed improvements at King and Greeley, and Quaker and South Greeley. Because of the proximity of Woodburn and South Greeley, it has also been included in the models.

For comparison to the alternatives examined in this memorandum, existing LOS are shown in Table 1.


February 8, 2016

Page | 6

Table 1: LOS Summary – Existing Conditions (Synchro)

Notes: 1. EB – Eastbound, WB – Westbound, NB – Northbound, SB – Southbound. 2. Street length measurements based on distance to adjacent intersection or off-ramp. 3. L – Left, T – Through, R – Right 4. Shaded queue lengths exceed available distance to the nearest intersection or end of full-width storage bay. Shaded LOS

indicates processing issues inherent to HCM 2010 methodologies.

Delay (sec.) LOS4

Delay (sec.) LOS4

EB 150 LTR 224.4 F 119.9 F

WB 300 LTR 20.5 C 15.7 C

NB 860 LTR 1.0 A 0.4 A

SB 100 LTR 0.5 A 1.4 A

36.4 E 32.1 D

NB 160 T 0.0 A 0.0 A

SB 150 TR 0.0 A 0.0 A

EB 500 L 79.6 F 61.5 F

NB 90 LT 24.5 C 100.6 F

SB 170 T 0.0 A 0.0 A

EB 500 R 18.1 C 10.0 A

WB 140 LTR

NB 150 LTR

SB 190 LTR 15.1 C 38.8 E

1.8 A 7.4 A

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Intersection

Intersection1 Approach

Distance of Streets and

Storage Bays

(ft)2

Lane

Group3

South Greeley Avenue (N‐S) @

Quaker Avenue EB (North Leg)

[TWO‐WAY STOP CONTROL]


Quaker Avenue EB (South Leg)



King Street



Woodburn Avenue


Intersection


February 8, 2016

Page | 7

The results of the Synchro modeling reveal existing unsatisfactory LOS F for key movements during the peak hours. EB left turns from Woodburn Avenue are often impacted by downstream traffic at the Quaker / South Greeley triangle apex, awaiting a slot to exit the Hamlet. This effect is also reflected on the NB movement at the south leg of the intersection. EB left turns from the north leg of Quaker Avenue also experience LOS F as they are subject to waiting for a gap in NB traffic on South Greeley Avenue. The one-way triangle circulation configuration proposed in this memorandum aims to resolve many of the PM Peak congestion concerns.

The King and Greeley intersection is subject to inherent discrepancies with the HCM 2010 methodologies; however, the WB movement is known to generally operate in near free-flow conditions, subjecting both the NB and SB movements to higher levels of delay while waiting for a gap in WB left turning traffic.

It should be noted that the Town typically provides supplemental traffic control at both King / Greeley and Woodburn / South Greeley during the following time periods:

King and Greeley:

Monday 3:15 - 4:15 PM

Tuesday 3:45 - 4:15 PM

Wednesday 3:15 - 4:15 PM

Thursday 3:45 - 4:15 PM

Friday 3:00 - 4:30 PM

Woodburn and South Greeley:

Monday 2:15 - 3:15 PM and 5:00 - 7:45 PM

Tuesday 2:15 - 2:50 PM and 5:00 - 7:45 PM

Wednesday 2:15 - 3:15 PM and 5:00 - 7:45 PM

Thursday 2:15 - 2:50 PM and 5:00 - 7:45 PM

Friday 2:15 - 3:00 PM and 5:00 - 7:45 PM

These times are approximate and subject to modification as the Town sees fit to accommodate traffic volumes or special school events. Robert E. Bell Middle School is located in the center of the Hamlet, nearly opposite the train station parking lot. A second entrance to the middle school exists at Senter Street, which also affects traffic volumes on King Street.

When a traffic agent is in place, an intersection will essentially behave similar to an all-way stop control scenario, as vehicles await direction to proceed. Therefore, it is felt that the daily use of a traffic agent is not unlike having a stop sign already in place on the WB King Street movement during peak PM conditions.


February 8, 2016

Page | 8

V. Proposed Interim Condition – King Street and N/S Greeley Avenues

Interim/Test-Case Condition

As discussed earlier in this memo, The Town of New Castle is in favor of performing an interim, “test-case” installation of a Stop Sign for WB King Street traffic. The Town requests that a test installation (and ultimately, a permanent installation) be granted for several reasons:

■ To fully understand the impacts of such an improvement on present-day operations at a minimal expense;

■ To verify the validity of and compare the results of Synchro, SimTraffic and VISSIM traffic modeling, as there are clear discrepancies;

■ To eliminate confusion on the WB approach, as drivers that are not as familiar with the existing conditions will slow down or stop, as is customary for a left turn movement through a bustling intersection in a Downtown Hamlet setting; and

■ To promote and unquestionably improve vehicular and pedestrian safety, in the spirit of the Downtown Hamlet Streetscape and Infrastructure Project

Video Monitoring of King Street and N/S Greeley Avenue Intersection

As part of a Town Board meeting in November 2015, it was decided that in order to capture the true day-to-day operations at King and Greeley, video monitoring would be the best approach. WSP procured a traffic video monitoring service in early December 2015 to film operational conditions at the King and Greeley intersection. Two camera angles fully captured all vehicular and pedestrian movements. Recording occurred between 6:00AM and 7:00PM on Thursday, December 3, 2015; Friday, December 4, 2015; Tuesday, December 8, 2015 and Wednesday, December 9, 2015. The period of 11:00AM to 3:00PM on Saturday, December 5, 2015 was also included.

WSP collected 43 hours of video over the four days of monitoring. Our focus was primarily on the behavior of WB traffic approaching the intersection, overall pedestrian operations and east-west pedestrian traffic across South Greeley Avenue where there is no painted crosswalk during peak time periods and on the days collected.

The table documents several instances of WB traffic stopping either to yield to pedestrians or for various other reasons, as documented. Such reasons include:

■ Possible confusion or unfamiliarity with the intersection;

■ Driver instinct to stop at a four-way intersection / unconventional left turn as the through-move;

■ Hesitation of NB traffic, resulting in confusion for both NB and WB movements; and

■ WB left turning traffic yielding to those pedestrians crossing South Greeley Avenue where there is no crosswalk.


February 8, 2016

Page | 9

It is felt that this representative sample of the data demonstrates these points clearly. With a stop sign in place, temporarily or permanently:

■ Confusion would be eliminated;

■ The intersection will behave as a typical all-way stop condition;

■ The remaining crosswalk can be added across South Greeley Avenue where there is anatural desire to cross as demonstrated in the video footage; and

■ Overall intersection safety should improve as a result.

Below is one still shot of many examples from the video footage demonstrating a pedestrian crossing illegally. This particular pedestrian sought to cross the NB movement while the WB movement is mid-turn. This could have potentially caused a rear-end accident or put their own safety at risk. The video can be viewed on the companion DVD that accompanies this memorandum.

Photo 1 – Pedestrian Crossing Illegally at King/Greeley

WSP also took a very specific look at the Friday, December 4, 2015 afternoon school peak following dismissal of Robert E. Bell Middle School. This period is roughly 2:30 PM to 2:47 PM. Further investigation beyond this peak noted that a traffic agent takes control of the intersection from that time, until roughly 4:07 PM. A second agent also participates in overseeing crossing protection across Lower King Street between roughly 3:03 PM and 3:52 PM.

As noted in our video timestamp summary table (see Appendix C), westbound traffic is required to stop numerous times between 2:35 PM and 2:47 PM, predominantly for crossing students. For several of the times noted, groups of students, sometimes 10 or more are seen


February 8, 2016

Page | 10

congregating and crossing together. In some instances, children are seen running across the street when by themselves or in smaller groups.

Another interesting observation is that most of the time, these same students are trying to cross from the east side of South Greeley Avenue to the west, abiding by the law by using the three available crosswalks instead of making an illegal crossing where there is currently no crosswalk. The walking path becomes north/south across King Street, west/east across North Greeley Avenue and south/north across Lower King Street. This configuration puts numerous pedestrians and students in the path of three legs of this intersection, requiring attention from three different vehicle movements instead of one. These observations are felt to be just cause to provide the “missing” fourth crosswalk and install a WB Stop Sign to control vehicle operations and mitigate pedestrian safety concerns.

The following still shots are included from a 10-second period to demonstrate the circuitous path of pedestrians.

Photo 2 – Pedestrians Using the Existing North/South Crossing at King/Greeley – Looking East


February 8, 2016

Page | 11

Photo 3 – Pedestrians Using the Existing North/South and East/West Crossings at King/Greeley – Looking North

Photo 3 – Pedestrians continuing along the existing North/South Crossing at King/Greeley – Looking North


February 8, 2016

Page | 12

It is also common behavior of NB traffic to inch forward into the intersection in an attempt to gain the right-of-way after they have stopped. This can sometimes cause the WB movement to slow or stop and allow the NB vehicle to pass. This unsafe condition can easily cause an accident due to confusion over which vehicle should proceed. With a stop sign in place, the WB move would simply stop and the NB move would proceed.

As noted, a companion DVD of the video data during the periods reviewed accompanies this memorandum for comparison against the table of timestamps. WSP can provide any additional video data upon request.

Town of New Castle Resolution for Interim WB Stop Sign

As requested by DOT Traffic and Safety, should the Region permit an interim/”test-case” WB stop sign installation, it will be necessary for the Town of New Castle to resolve that they are willing to remove this stop sign a maximum of one month from the date of installation. The DOT will be permitted to reduce the time-frame to two weeks at their discretion and may ultimately request that the Stop Sign be removed, should it be determined to be a hindrance to traffic operations or introduce a safety concern. This is documented in the accompanying Town cover letter.

Town of New Castle Position on One-Way, Northbound, North Greeley Avenue

A discussion item during the October 2, 2015 Town / DOT / WSP traffic meeting was the consideration of converting North Greeley Avenue to one-way northbound traffic between the King / Greeley intersection and Maple Avenue. As noted in the Town’s cover memo, they are not in favor of this conversion for several reasons:

■ The width and steep up-hill grade from North Greeley Avenue are not suitable for through traffic, particularly during inclement weather where vehicles may not be able to traverse this route; and

■ Maple Avenue is a residential area with a 5000 lb vehicle weight restriction (except local delivery). Sending through traffic to King Street via Maple Avenue would undoubtedly require the Town to rescind this weight restriction – a decision not readily supported by the Town.

Approach for Monitoring the Interim Stop Condition

As requested by DOT Traffic and Safety, if an interim stop condition is granted, the Town will be responsible for closely monitoring traffic conditions while the temporary Stop Sign is in place in coordination with DOT. WSP proposes the following methods:

■ On-scene, visual observation and use of digital camera to record short video clips. Video can then be transmitted to DOT Traffic and Safety almost immediately;

■ A second round of video monitoring, similar to that performed in early December 2015. Video would be provided to DOT;


February 8, 2016

Page | 13

■ Peak hour counting program (manual or through video monitoring service) in order to calibrate both Synchro and VISSIM models;

■ WSP and the Town can be available for field meetings with the DOT upon request;

■ Speed runs (pre & post Stop sign installation); and

■ Queue length measurements (pre & post Stop sign installation).

WSP’s office is located just minutes from the site. We anticipate a smooth, consistent coordination effort with DOT Traffic and Safety and can accommodate any special requests for providing observation of the test condition.

VI. Proposed Permanent Condition – King Street and N/S Greeley Avenues

The existing configuration of the King and Greeley intersection is as follows:

■ NB approach (South Greeley Avenue) is a one-lane approach with Stop control and a channelized right turn lane. A yield sign, essentially allowing a free-flow movement with minimal interruption, controls the channelized right turn lane;

■ SB approach (North Greeley Avenue) is a one-lane approach with Stop control;

■ WB approach (King Street/NY 120) is a free flow, one-lane approach; and

■ EB approach (Lower King Street) does not exist, as Lower King is a one-way WB street.


February 8, 2016

Page | 14

Figure 2 – Existing Conditions at King Street and N/S Greeley Avenue

The proposed condition of King and Greeley within the Downtown Hamlet Streetscape and Infrastructure Project includes the following desired improvements:

■ Permanent installation of a Stop Sign on the WB King Street approach.

This will eliminate driver confusion, as evidenced by the supporting video monitoring. Thislends itself to the installation of the “missing” crosswalk on the NB intersection leg.

■ Installation of the fourth, “missing” crosswalk, across the NB approach (South Greeley Avenue)

Pedestrians already use this path, while technically illegal, without a crosswalk in place. Schoolchildren utilize the remaining three crosswalks just to get across the street, which provides agreater exposure of pedestrians to vehicular traffic. This is supported through our videofindings, included as a supplement to this memorandum. The installation of a permanent stopsign on WB King Street would offer a much higher level of protection and bring permanence tothis unofficial pedestrian movement across South Greeley Avenue.

■ The conversion of the NB approach to a two-lane approach, striped as one left-through lane andone right-turn only lane.


February 8, 2016

Page | 15

■ Elimination of the channelized right turn lane and yield sign. The existing space facilitating the present day channelized right turn lane will be converted to open space for pedestrian use.

This will improve safety by eliminating the need to cross a near-free flow channelized right turn lane and shortening the crossing distance for pedestrians across the westbound approach of Lower King Street.

■ State-Law – Yield to Pedestrians in Crosswalk (NYR9-7) Signs at all Pedestrian Crossings, either post mounted or within the crosswalks, mounted directly to the ground on the double yellow centerline

Signs mounted to the ground may have a traffic calming effect and bring visual attention to the crosswalks.

■ Consideration is also being given to providing raised crosswalks, similar to NYSDOT Standard Sheet 608-07. WSP requests DOT input on such an installation.


February 8, 2016

Page | 16

Figure 3 – Proposed Conditions at King Street and N/S Greeley Avenue

The Proposed Condition explores these alterations while also considering the effect of the improvements on adjacent intersections. For comparison to the existing conditions and the alternatives examined in this memorandum, Proposed Levels of Service are shown in Table 2. Refer to the Planning and Design Assumptions regarding the growth rate applied to obtain ETC+30 volumes for this analysis.


February 8, 2016

Page | 17

Table 2: LOS Summary – Proposed Condition (VISSIM)

Notes: 1. EB – Eastbound, WB – Westbound, NB – Northbound, SB – Southbound. 2. Street length measurements based on distance to adjacent intersection or off-ramp. 3. L – Left, T – Through, R – Right, DefL – DeFacto Left Turn. 4. Shaded queue lengths exceed available distance to the nearest intersection or end of full-width storage bay.

Max Queue (ft)

Delay (sec.) LOS

Queue (ft)

Delay (sec.) LOS

Max Queue (ft)

Delay (sec.) LOS

Max Queue (ft)

Delay (sec.) LOS

EB 150 LTR 121 12.5 B 127 12.9 B 140 14.8 B 199 19.8 C

WB 300 LTR 59 9.0 A 63 8.9 A 68 9.8 A 82 12.6 B

NB 860 LTR 47 1.3 A 55 1.2 A 55 2.2 A 232 12.5 B

SB 90 LTR 28 0.3 A 38 0.3 A 37 0.5 A 64 0.7 A

2.9 A 3.1 A 5.3 A 10.4 B

EB 500 R 284 21.0 C 284 22.4 C 109 7.6 A 118 7.6 A

NB 90 LT 82 1.3 A 60 1.4 A 151 3.1 A 161 6.8 A

SB 170 T 0 0.5 A 0 0.5 A 0 0.3 A 29 0.7 A

11.6 B 11.9 B 3.4 A 6.0 A

EB 500 L 251 21.1 C 251 26.4 D 242 19.7 C 252 23.2 C

NB 170 T 0 2.7 A 0 4.4 A 0 2.7 A 0 3.6 A

SB 170 TR 7 0.2 A 6 0.2 A 17 0.2 A 11 0.1 A

15.3 C 19.2 C 12.6 B 15.0 B

WB 140 LTR 193 25.9 D 194 31.4 D 200 31.2 D 195 33.8 D

150 LT 227 15.0 B 242 17.4 C 195 13.5 B 236 15.2 C

100 R 224 20.8 C 238 24.3 C 192 14.4 B 233 16.6 C

SB 190 LTR 74 7.7 A 56 7.8 A 94 9.8 A 105 10.7 B

21.7 C 25.8 D 20.4 C 22.2 C

ETC+30 VolumesETC+30 Volumes

PM Peak Hour

Intersection

NB

Existing Volumes Existing Volumes

South Greeley Avenue @

King Street

[ALL‐WAY STOP CONTROL]

Intersection

Intersection Approach1


Storage Bays

(ft)2Lane

Group3


Woodburn Avenue


Intersection


Quaker Avenue South Leg

[TWO‐WAY STOP CONTROL]Intersection


Quaker Avenue North Leg


AM Peak Hour


February 8, 2016

Page | 18

The VISSIM model predicts that traffic operations throughout the Downtown Hamlet would operate at acceptable levels of service. The present day free-flow WB movement would reduce in LOS to D; however, the overall intersection performance should improve as a whole, not to mention the improvement of safety conditions. ETC+30 models also appear to perform in acceptable ranges, based on the growth assumptions mentioned earlier in this memorandum.

VII. Proposed Permanent Condition – Quaker Road and South Greeley Avenue – OneWay Circulation “Triangular Roundabout”

The existing configuration of the Quaker and South Greeley intersection is as follows:

■ EB Quaker Avenue is a two-lane approach that diverges at the apex of the existing triangle. A leftturn lane utilizes the north leg of the triangle and the right turn lane utilizes the south leg;

■ WB Quaker Avenue converges two approach lanes to one beyond the apex of the existingtriangle. Those approaching from the south leg must gain the right-of-way from both the EBapproach left turn lane and WB through lane, exiting the hamlet;

■ Left turns are restricted from the south leg of Quaker Avenue onto South Greeley Avenue; and

■ Street parking is prohibited along Quaker Avenue and is only permitted on the east side of SouthGreeley Avenue.

The existing Quaker Avenue and South Greeley Avenue intersection configuration is shown in Figure 4.


February 8, 2016

Page | 19

Figure 4 – Existing Intersection Configuration of South Greeley Avenue and Quaker Avenue

The proposed condition of Quaker and South Greeley within the Downtown Hamlet Streetscape and Infrastructure Project includes the following improvements: ■ Eliminate one direction for each leg of the Quaker Avenue triangle. This would result in the south

leg converting to an eastbound-only operation and the north leg converting to a westbound-only operation;

■ Although each leg would retain two lanes, the north leg will merge down to one lane prior to the overpass section of roadway;

■ The south leg would be striped to include one left turn-only lane and one right turn-only lane; and

■ South Greeley Avenue would essentially remain in the same configuration.

Conversion of this intersection to one-way circulation would favorably eliminate two conflict points and improve safety conditions at the apex of triangle, where westbound traffic on the south leg must currently wait for a gap in both eastbound and westbound traffic on the north leg. South Greeley Avenue would remain in its current configuration; however, in order to accommodate a WB-50 truck


February 8, 2016

Page | 20

turning radius from eastbound Quaker Avenue to northbound South Greeley Avenue, the south curb line of the triangle median must be moved west. Figure 5 illustrates the proposed concept. The layout as shown is also capable of accommodating a WB-62 design vehicle.

It should be noted that this intersection configuration has support from the Town of New Castle Town Board, DPW and Technical Staff. Additionally, following our October 2, 2015 meeting where this concept was briefly discussed with DOT, WSP revised the configuration to include the requested pedestrian refuge islands. These are seen as an added safety benefit by all parties.

Figure 5 – Triangular Roundabout Concept for South Greeley Avenue and Quaker Avenue


February 8, 2016

Page | 21

Table 3: LOS Summary – Triangular Roundabout with WB King Stop Sign (VISSIM)

Notes: 1. EB – Eastbound, WB – Westbound, NB – Northbound, SB – Southbound. 2. Street length measurements based on distance to adjacent intersection or off-ramp. 3. L – Left, T – Through, R – Right 4. Shaded queue lengths exceed available distance to the nearest intersection or end of full-width storage bay.

Max Queue (ft)

Delay (sec.) LOS

Max Queue (ft)

Delay (sec.) LOS

Max Queue (ft)

Delay (sec.) LOS

Max Queue (ft)

Delay (sec.) LOS

EB 150 LTR 113 11.9 B 141 13.2 B 129 13.6 B 157 14.3 B

WB 300 LTR 58 8.9 A 65 9.1 A 68 9.1 A 80 9.7 A

NB 860 LTR 49 1.0 A 53 1.1 A 26 0.5 A 43 0.6 A

SB 100 LTR 26 0.3 A 41 0.4 A 36 0.5 A 72 0.6 A

2.8 A 3.1 A 4.4 A 4.8 A

500 L 264 24.1 C 264 29.9 D 251 26.2 D 273 35.5 E

500 R 280 21.1 C 280 22.2 C 86 7.6 A 126 8.0 A

NB 90 T 0 0.4 A 0 0.8 A 0 0.5 A 0 0.7 A

SB 170 T 0 0.5 A 0 0.5 A 0 0.2 A 0 0.3 A

14.9 B 16.5 C 8.8 A 11.6 B

WB 140 LTR 201 25.2 D 200 32.2 D 194 30.7 D 202 33.7 D

150 LT 239 13.5 B 280 17.8 C 144 11.4 B 172 13.0 B

100 R 225 18.0 C 275 23.9 C 136 11.5 B 168 13.4 B

SB 190 LTR 70 7.6 A 58 7.8 A 94 9.5 A 99 9.9 A

20.2 C 26.0 D 19.0 C 20.7 C

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Existing Volumes ETC+30 Volumes Existing Volumes ETC+30 Volumes

Intersection Approach1


Storage Bays

(ft)2Lane

Group3


Woodburn Avenue


Intersection


Quaker Avenue EB


EB

Intersection


King Street

[ALL‐WAY STOP CONTROL]

NB

Intersection


February 8, 2016

Page | 22

The results of this VISSIM model are similar to those in Table 2, predicting that traffic operations throughout the Downtown Hamlet would operate at acceptable levels of service. Performance of the one-way circulation “Triangular Roundabout” is slightly better than the current configuration in the short term.

ETC+30 models also appear to perform in acceptable ranges. While the proposed intersection configuration will operate better as a whole in the PM Peak Hour, the EB left turn move is expected to perform at LOS E. This assumes that the growth potential in the Hamlet is fully realized as assumed earlier in this memorandum.

VIII. Accident Analysis

Earlier in the preliminary study phase of the Hamlet Improvement Project, WSP performed a corridor wide accident analysis for a three-year period between July 1, 2011 and June 30, 2014 in accordance with Accident Analysis Procedures listed in Chapter 5 of the DOT HDM (Highway Design Manual). WSP utilized HSA (Highway Safety Analysis) Software, typical of DOT applications. The purpose of the analysis was to identify any present day safety problems, investigate accident patterns or clusters and ascertain whether the causes of the accidents are correctable or non-correctable. Note that all accidents being discussed were obtained from either NYSDMV MV-104A Accident Report forms or Town of New Castle Police Reports.

Accidents may be classified as “correctable” or “non-correctable”. An accident is defined as “correctable” if it can be correlated to a correctable non-standard or deficient physical feature found at the accident location such as a tight curve with poor sight distance, or poor pavement conditions. A “non-correctable” accident is mainly attributed to driver behavior factors, such as driver inattention (e.g., daydreaming and talking to passengers), alcohol involvement, and unsafe, aggressive driving maneuvers.

For the purposes of this memorandum, the analysis discussion will focus only on the King and Greeley and Quaker and South Greeley intersections. Within the HSA Software Database, each intersection or mid-block segment between intersections is assigned a Key Number in order to organize the locations of the accidents. These numbers are referenced below and can be compared against the output in Appendix D.

King Street (NY 120) and N/S Greeley Avenue (Key #8)

During the three-year study period, it was determined that there were 11 accidents at or in close proximity to this intersection. The predominant type of accident was sideswipe (6), noted mostly in the MV-104A accident reports as involving parked vehicles or collisions with vehicles trying to exit a parking space. The predominant contributing factor to these accidents was documented as “failure to yield.” Other accident types included rear-end (3), pedestrian (1) and right angle (1).

The calculated accident rate for this intersection is 0.92 accidents per MEV (million entering vehicles). This is more than 6 times the statewide average accident rate of 0.15 accidents per MEV.


February 8, 2016

Page | 23

Failure to yield is a “non-correctable” cause of the sideswipe accidents that are occurring, as it is related to driver behavior. It is the intention of the Town’s Hamlet Improvement project to retain all existing parking in the vicinity of this intersection. The current design of the intersection and approach roadways considers applicable NYSDOT Design Criteria (HDM Chapter 2), ensuring that standard travel and parking lane widths are incorporated and advanced to final design. These criteria may have minor impact on final curb location (6 inches to 1 foot shifts); however, all attempts are being made to preserve existing sidewalk area where possible. In short, elimination of parking is not being considered a mitigation strategy for sideswipe accidents and is not supported by the Town.

The three rear end accidents were all noted to have been caused by “following too closely,” another non-correctable cause. Weather was not noted as a factor. The pedestrian accident is attributed to “driver inattention” and appears to have occurred on wet pavement in the north-south crosswalk across the WB leg of King Street. There is the potential that with a WB King Street Stop Sign in place, as requested by this memo, and sufficient advance notification of a Stop Sign, this accident may have been prevented.

Since the intersections and mid-block segments in the Downtown Hamlet are in such close proximity, we feel it prudent to also make mention of the adjacent roadway segments leading up to King and Greeley. This also accounts for disparity in the MV104 accident reports as to actual accident location.

The WB approach to King and Greeley (King St between Greeley Avenue and Senter Street) is assigned Key #9. This section of roadway had three accidents in the three-year study period; however, because the length of this mid-block section is relatively short, it exceeded the Statewide Average by almost four times. The calculated accident rate for this segment is 8.37 accidents per MVM (million vehicle miles), while the statewide average for a comparable roadway segment is 2.25 accidents per MVM. All three accidents in this segment were noted as sideswipe, similar to King and Greeley. Two are related to parking while the remaining accident is related to an illegal U-turn. Causes listed include “passing or lane usage improper” and “turning improperly”.

The NB approach to King and Greeley (South Greeley Avenue) between Quaker Road and King Street is assigned Key #7. There were four accidents during the three-year study period. Similarly, this mid-block segment is relatively short and coincidentally calculated to a rate of 8.37 accidents per MVM. The statewide average for this segment is also 2.25 accidents per MVM. Of the four accidents, three were noted as sideswipe/parking while the remaining accident was a right angle accident attributed to a driver medical condition.

The SB approach to King and Greeley (North Greeley Avenue) between King Street and Maple Avenue is assigned Key #25. This high accident segment experienced ten accidents in the three-year study period, with a rate of 24.34 accidents per MVM. This is more than ten times the statewide average for this segment – also 2.25 accidents per MVM. Of the ten accidents, nine were noted as sideswipe/parking – a common theme in the Downtown Hamlet. The predominant cause was documented as “failure to keep right.” This is attributed to drivers trying to stay clear of parked cars on either side of North Greeley Avenue and is a result of the narrow road width for this roadway segment. Additional causes include “failure to yield right-of-way,”


February 8, 2016

Page | 24

“passing or lane usage improper,” and “slippery pavement.” The remaining accident was a head on accident, also attributed to “failure to keep right.”

North Greeley Avenue and its approach to the King and Greeley intersection are well known to have narrow travel and parking lane widths, causing a safety concern for safe passage. It is the intent of the Town’s project to mitigate this high accident rate by performing a minor widening of North Greeley Avenue to the east. This will allow for adequate travel and parking lane widths and an anticipated reduction in parking and sideswipe related accidents.

The EB approach to King and Greeley (Lower King Street) does not approach the intersection as it is one-way westbound; therefore, it was not reviewed as a part of this analysis.

Quaker Road (NY 120) and South Greeley Avenue (Key #6, 23 and 28)

The assignment of three key numbers to this intersection distinguishes between the north leg intersection with South Greeley Avenue (#6), the south leg intersection with South Greeley Avenue (#23) and the apex of the triangle (#28). Combined, there were 16 accidents over the three-year study period.

The intersection of the north leg of Quaker Road and South Greeley Avenue contributes to 10 of the 16 accidents at this intersection over the three-year study period. The location exceeds the statewide average of 0.15 accidents per MEV by nearly six times, at 0.84 accidents per MEV. The predominant accident type was noted as rear end (6) followed by left turn (3) and right angle (1). Causes for the rear end accidents were noted as “following too closely,” “driver inattention,” “slippery pavement” and “backing unsafely” which may have been a driver overcorrecting after pulling too far onto South Greeley Avenue.

Behavior such as following too closely and inattention are considered non-correctable. Considering that the left turn movement from the north leg of the triangle requires the driver to turn their head over their right shoulder to obtain a clear view, it is expected that drivers will hesitate and brake more than once, increasing the chances for rear end accidents. This is an inevitable consequence of a stop condition on a downgrade; however, the desired conversion of this intersection into a “Triangular Roundabout” will greatly improve sight lines for the left turn movement, as it will be relocated to the south leg of the triangle.

The intersection of the south leg of Quaker Road and South Greeley Avenue saw four of the 16 accidents during the three-year study period. This location had an accident rate of 0.26 accidents per MEV, nearly double the statewide average of 0.15 accidents per MEV. Two accidents were rear end while the other two were sideswipe. Causes vary, from “backing unsafely,” “following too closely,” and “slippery pavement” for the rear end accidents; to “reaction to other vehicle” and “turning improperly” for the sideswipe accidents. Conditions are similar, with a stop condition on a downgrade, however left turns are presently restricted. Lines of sight are generally not obstructed. The new “triangular roundabout” configuration would maintain a similar right turn movement and add the left turn move.

The apex of the triangle at South Greeley Avenue and Quaker Road contains two points of conflict. North/westbound left turning traffic from South Greeley Avenue must gain the right-of-way from both: north/eastbound, left turning traffic entering the Hamlet and south/westbound


February 8, 2016

Page | 25

through traffic already on the north leg of the triangle. During the three-year study period, two accidents were recorded at this location, with an accident rate of 0.13 accidents per MEV, just below the statewide average of 0.15 accidents per MEV. One accident was a head-on accident related to a medical condition. The other accident was a rear-end accident due to alcohol involvement and following too closely.

The fact that the accident rate is below the statewide average during our given study period should not factor negatively in the consideration of converting this intersection to the desired “triangular roundabout” configuration. In doing so, the two conflict points at the triangle apex would cease to exist – eliminating a recognized safety concern by both the Town and WSP.

IX. Roundabout Considerations

At the October 2, 2015 meeting, DOT Traffic and Safety requested the consideration of roundabouts at the two subject intersections. After investigating, WSP has concluded that a roundabout would not be preferred at either King and Greeley or Quaker and South Greeley for the following reasons:

King Street (NY 120) and N/S Greeley Avenue

■ The FHWA’s “Roundabouts: An Informational Guide” recommends that the minimumdiameter of the inscribed circle of a roundabout for Urban Single Lane (WB-50 designvehicle) be 100 feet, with a range up to 130 feet. Installing a 100-foot diameter roundaboutat the King and Greeley intersection will compromise the already limited frontage on at leasttwo building corners at a given orientation. This would negate the project’s goal ofpromoting pedestrian space;

■ Even in the best-case scenario, a roundabout favoring the south-east corner of theintersection would not allow WB King Street to properly line up with the roundabout andwould result in an “Offset Right” alignment, which is deemed unacceptable by the FHWAguide; and

■ The downgrade of King Street combined with the horizontal curve east of the intersection isgenerally not considered favorable in advance of a roundabout.

For these reasons, a roundabout at this location is not being considered as an alternative.

Quaker Road (NY 120) and South Greeley Avenue

■ The existing grade of Quaker Road is in the range of 8.5% to 9%. As per the FHWA guide,the maximum grade permitted through a roundabout is 4%. As such, a major verticalrealignment would be required between the recently construction Quaker Road Bridge overMNRR and Railroad Street and South Greeley Avenue; and

■ Additionally, the grade of South Greeley Avenue would need to rise on the order of severalfeet to meet the proposed roundabout. Retaining walls would be required. Constructioncosts would be extensive and outweigh the geometric benefits that a roundabout has tooffer.


February 8, 2016

Page | 26

In lieu of a traditional roundabout, the Town wishes to pursue the “Triangular Roundabout” discussed earlier in the memorandum. This will allow the present day grades to be retained, there is high benefit vs. construction costs, and minimized disturbance and improved safety conditions will result.

X. Summary of Recommendations / Requests

Based on the information provided in this technical memorandum, the Town of New Castle and WSP request:

■ DOT’s full consideration of the information provided in this memorandum and authorizationto install an interim, “test-case” Stop Sign for the WB King Street movement in order to fullystudy and understand real-life impacts as compared to differing traffic model softwarepackages.

The interim Stop Sign would only be permitted for a maximum of four weeks. NYSDOTmay edit this time-frame to two weeks and may also request that the Stop Sign beremoved by Town forces at their discretion, immediately upon request, should it bedetermined that the sign is detrimental to operations or safety.

The Town of New Castle will resolve the conditions set forth by NYSDOT with regard tothe installation of an interim stop sign and provide a copy upon authorization to proceedwith the interim condition.

■ Concurrence with the proposed King and Greeley intersection configuration. This includesthe permanent installation of a Stop Condition on WB King Street for the multitude of safetyconcerns discussed in this memorandum. The Town and WSP will then advance finaldesign of the intersection.

■ Concurrence with the proposed “Triangular Roundabout” configuration, as described earlierin the technical memorandum. The Town and WSP will then advance final design of theintersection.


February 8, 2016

Appendix A

June 2015 Technical Memorandum to NYSDOT


February 8, 2016


MEMORANDUM

To: Richard Dillmann, P.E., NYSDOT Region 8 Traffic and Safety; Kevin Roseman, WCDPWT, Traffic Engineer

From: Jared Anderson, P.E., Project Engineer, Roadway Task Leader

Cc:

Robert Severance, P.E., Project Manager Bernie Kalus, P.E., Traffic Task Leader

Date: June 17, 2015

Project Name: Hamlet of Chappaqua Improvement Project, Town of New Castle, NY

Reference Number: WSP 1400042

Re: Traffic Recommendations within the Hamlet of Chappaqua

Rich, Kevin – As previously discussed at our November 2014 traffic coordination meeting with the Town of New Castle, WSP has been investigating potential low cost recommendations to implement within the Hamlet of Chappaqua in the short term. We have confirmed queuing conditions and adjusted our AM & PM Peak Existing Condition Synchro models to better reflect actual conditions within the Hamlet. Following March and April meetings with the Town Board, the following are recommendations to be implemented for the King / Greeley intersection as a semi-permanent installation: ■ Install a Stop Sign for WB King Street traffic ■ Install a Stop Ahead and accompanying “New” Panel on WB King Street, sufficiently in advance of the subject

intersection ■ Removal of the existing raised, curbed island and replacement with a temporary asphalt section, flush with the

adjacent pavement ■ Installation of a temporary “Qwick” curb or similar style at a 40 foot radius ■ Formation of a short right turn bay with the space made available by eliminating the slip right-turn bay ■ Placement of a cross walk across the south leg of the intersection where one does not currently exist ■ Restripe and add stop bars accordingly – taking into consideration the turning template of a WB-50 vehicle Please see the attached for a graphical depiction of the proposed recommendations. While these improvements are not intended to be the permanent solution to the traffic concerns within the Hamlet of Chappaqua, they are seen as having added immediate benefit of improved safety and incremental operational improvements. They are being brought to your attention for review and consideration such that they may be implemented in the short term to observe their true effect in advance of the Town’s planned infrastructure and streetscape project for the downtown corridor. As noted in the attached LOS output, the NB and SB approaches to the King Street and Greeley Avenue intersection currently operate as LOS F in the AM and PM peak, while WB King Street operates at near free flow at LOS A. The introduction of a stop sign on WB King Street, effectively creating an all way stop condition, would provide gaps for NB and SB Greeley Avenue traffic to flow and allows pedestrians to cross where they currently must either wait for a gap or be given the right-of-way by a WB vehicle. It would also eliminate confusion, as drivers were frequently observed slowing to a near stop in the WB direction as they do not anticipate having the

2 | 2

right-of-way. This contributes to higher than average accident rates in and around this intersection. Law enforcement typically assists in traffic control during peak periods to allow pedestrians and traffic to flow on North and South Greeley Avenues. In an interim WB Stop condition (see Alternative 1 in the LOS Summary), NB Greeley Avenue would still operate at LOS F in both the AM and PM Peak, however the anticipated delay is improved, particularly in the PM. SB Greeley Avenue improves to LOS B in both peak periods. The stop condition on WB King Street eliminates the near free flow of today and results in LOS F in the AM and LOS E in the PM. While the heavier westbound commuter volume during AM peak would be subject to a stop condition that is not present today, there are several safety benefits, such as: ■ Definitive stop conditions at all approaches, providing gaps for the lower volume movements ■ Improved pedestrian safety by having all movements stop ■ Anticipated accident reduction by reducing confusion and vehicle speeds While we acknowledge that the introduction of an LOS F is not the desire of any improvement, we recommend the implementation of a WB Stop Sign (and proper W3-1 Stop Ahead signage with a W16-15P “New” panel) as a test-case to be supported with visual observation and additional study to compare the Synchro models to true conditions. Additionally, the Town would always have the ability to assume control of the intersection with law enforcement control if the improvement is found to have a detrimental effect during the peak hours. As a last resort, the stop related signs could be removed. WSP took the analysis a step further and considered a WB stop condition if it were to become a permanently adopted solution, adding a formalized NB right turn bay (see Alternative 2 in the LOS Summary). The present day NB right turn channelized slip lane is planned for removal in the full improvement project to provide additional pedestrian and green space. It also provides a direct north/south crosswalk across King Street, eliminating a conflict point in the slip lane. If left in place, it would hinder the ability of SB vehicles on North Greeley Avenue to make left turns onto EB King Street and the same pedestrian safety concerns would remain as today. As observed in the attached summary, the NB Greeley Avenue approach would still operate at LOS F; however, delay continues to improve as NB rights are less likely to be blocked from their ability to turn by queueing NB through traffic. The PM condition improves for NB and SB Greeley Avenue considerably over the existing and WB King Street drops to LOS E. Given the results of these analyses, we recommend the implementation of these semi-permanent mitigation measures as a low-cost option to improve safety and operations within the Hamlet. As noted, Synchro files have been prepared for the existing conditions and the two alternatives for the AM and PM peak periods for the downtown Hamlet network and are included with this memo. The introduction of a traffic signal at this intersection has also been discussed with the Town. If the Town has interest in pursuing this alternative, WSP will provide a standalone study with supporting documentation for review. Please note that the restriction of left turns out of Woodburn Avenue onto South Greeley Avenue (County Route 79) as previously discussed in November 2014 is no longer being pursued. With your concurrence, we will forward drawings and a highway work permit to the appropriate parties. Thank you for your consideration.

Delay (sec) LOS* Delay

(sec) LOS* Delay (sec) LOS* Delay

(sec) LOS* Delay (sec) LOS* Delay

(sec) LOS*

Overall IntersectionNB - Greeley Ave 136.2 F ** F 95.7 F 75.4 F 69.8 F 19.2 CSB - Greeley Ave 147.0 F ** F 11.6 B 12.8 B 11.7 B 12.7 BWB - King Street 5.5 A 7.5 A 76.2 F 41.8 E 75.1 F 35.5 E

* LOS output is HCM 2000** Delay is greater than 150 seconds

Permanent Stop at WB King St with NB Right Turn

Lane

AM PM

King St @ Greeley Ave Unsignalized

Alternative 1 Alternative 2

Hamlet of Chappaqua Improvement ProjectTown of New Castle, NY

LOS Summary for King Street (NY 120) and North/South Greeley Avenue Intersection

Intersection ApproachPM

Interim Stop at WB King

AM PM AM

Existing (2014)

6/17/2015


February 8, 2016

Appendix B

Traffic Modeling Software Comparison Tables


February 8, 2016


Existing Conditions

Delay (sec.) LOS2

Max Queue (ft)

Delay (sec.) LOS

Max Queue (ft)

Delay (sec.) LOS2

EB 150 LTR 224.4 F 110 13.0 B 125 12.1 B

WB 300 LTR 20.5 C 96 7.4 A 67 8.9 A

NB 860 LTR 1.0 A 77 3.2 A 49 1.0 A

SB 100 LTR 0.5 A 95 0.8 A 29 0.3 A

36.4 E 3.5 A 2.8 A

WB 140 LTR 71 1.6 A 46 0.5 A

NB 150 LTR 136 3.1 A 96 1.8 A

SB 190 LTR 15.1 C 88 8.4 A 89 9.9 A

1.8 A 2.8 A 1.8 A

Notes:

1. Analysis uses Existing Volumes.

2. Results using HCM 2010 methodology.


King Street


Intersection Approach


Storage Bays (ft)

Lane Group

AM Peak Hour

Synchro v8 VISSIM v7Sim Traffic v8


Woodburn Avenue


Intersection

Existing Conditions

Delay (sec.) LOS2

Max Queue (ft)

Delay (sec.) LOS

Max Queue (ft)

Delay (sec.) LOS2

EB 150 LTR 119.9 F 150 14.1 B 153 14.1 B

WB 300 LTR 15.7 C 128 11.1 B 64 9.0 A

NB 860 LTR 0.4 A 115 2.7 A 33 0.5 A

SB 100 LTR 1.4 A 54 0.8 A 30 0.3 A

32.1 D 5.8 A 4.5 A

WB 140 LTR 72 1.9 A 65 0.5 A

NB 150 LTR 182 8.9 A 172 5.1 A

SB 190 LTR 38.8 E 101 13.8 B 102 13.0 B

7.4 A 6.7 A 4.3 A

Notes:


2. Results using HCM 2010 methodology.

Sim Traffic v8 VISSIM v7


Woodburn Avenue


Intersection


King Street




Storage Bays (ft)

Lane Group

PM Peak Hour

Synchro v8

King Street with All‐Way Stop Control

Delay (sec.) LOS2

Max Queue (ft)

Delay (sec.) LOS2

Max Queue (ft)

Delay (sec.) LOS2

EB 150 LTR 224.4 F 84 13.5 B 121 12.2 B

WB 300 LTR 20.5 C 52 7.9 A 58 8.7 A

NB 860 LTR 1.0 A 96 5.5 A 48 1.0 A

SB 100 LTR 0.5 A 31 0.7 A 42 0.3 A

36.4 E 4.2 A 2.8 A

WB 140 LTR 61.4 F 80 5.4 A 197 27.3 D

NB 150 LTR 58.3 F 27 2.2 A 64 1.5 A

SB 190 LTR 11.4 B 50 5.5 A 76 7.6 A

56.6 F 3.7 A 13.2 B

Notes:


2. All results using HCM 2010 methodology.

AM Peak Hour

Synchro v8 VISSIM v7Sim Traffic v8


King Street

[ALL‐WAY STOP CONTROL]Intersection



Storage Bays (ft)

Lane Group


Woodburn Avenue


Intersection

King Street with All‐Way Stop Control

Delay (sec.) LOS2

Max Queue (ft)

Delay (sec.) LOS2

Max Queue (ft)

Delay (sec.) LOS2

EB 150 LTR 119.9 F 155 14.8 B 138 13.8 B

WB 300 LTR 15.7 C 54 8.5 A 64 9.0 A

NB 860 LTR 0.4 A 30 1.7 A 26 0.5 A

SB 100 LTR 1.4 A 50 1.4 A 30 0.4 A

32.1 D 6.4 A 4.4 A

WB 140 LTR 62.8 F 138 9.9 A 203 32.8 D

NB 150 LTR 60.6 F 54 4.2 A 113 3.3 A

SB 190 LTR 13.9 B 79 7.4 A 94 9.3 A

55.4 F 6.8 A 16.0 C

Notes:




Woodburn Avenue


Intersection


King Street


Sim Traffic v8



Storage Bays (ft)

Lane Group

PM Peak Hour

Synchro v8 VISSIM v7

King Street with All‐Way Stop Control and NB Storage Lane

Delay (sec.) LOS2

Max Queue (ft)

Delay (sec.) LOS2

EB 150 LTR 224.4 F 146 20.9 C

WB 300 LTR 20.5 C 52 7.2 A

NB 860 LTR 1.0 A 53 2.3 A

SB 100 LTR 0.5 A 74 1.0 A

36.4 E 4.0 A

WB 140 LTR 61.4 F 46 4.7 A

NB 150 LTR 54.5 F 65 4.7 A

SB 190 LTR 11.6 B 54 5.6 A

54.7 F 4.8 A

Notes:



AM Peak Hour

Synchro v8 Sim Traffic v8


Woodburn Avenue


Intersection


King Street




Storage Bays (ft)

Lane Group

King Street with All‐Way Stop Control and NB Storage Lane

Delay (sec.) LOS2

Max Queue (ft)

Delay (sec.) LOS2

EB 150 LTR 119.9 F 64 9.7 A

WB 300 LTR 15.7 C 54 6.9 A

NB 860 LTR 0.4 A 0 1.2 A

SB 100 LTR 1.4 A 30 0.5 A

32.1 D 3.4 A

WB 140 LTR 54.5 F 154 17.3 C

NB 150 LTR 23.1 C 113 6.8 A

SB 190 LTR 13.9 B 55 7.4 A

34.4 D 11.0 B

Notes:



PM Peak Hour

Synchro v8 Sim Traffic v8


Woodburn Avenue


Intersection


King Street




Storage Bays (ft)

Lane Group


February 8, 2016

Appendix C

Video Timestamp Summary Table


February 8, 2016


WB Traffic Stops for WB Peds WB Traffic Slows/Stops for Other Reasons Reason Peds Crossing NB Leg - No Crosswalk

7:11:22 AM 7:13:12 AM Possible Confusion 7:01:59 AM7:13:04 AM 7:32:26 AM Possible Confusion 7:11:52 AM7:14:51 AM 7:35:18 AM Peds Crossing North Greeley 7:40:34 AM7:23:28 AM 7:41:28 AM Letting NB Traffic Pass 7:42:36 AM7:28:45 AM 7:42:43 AM Peds Crossing South Greeley (no x-walk) 7:50:36 AM

7:53:43 AM Peds Crossing Lower King/NB Traffic 7:58:14 AM5:07:58 PM 5:01:02 PM NB Traffic Hesitated 5:02:01 PM5:13:40 PM 5:02:40 PM Possible Confusion 5:11:59 PM5:26:58 PM 5:08:20 PM Possible Confusion 5:13:31 PM5:37:09 PM 5:15:10 PM Letting SB Traffic Pass 5:58:18 PM5:52:19 PM 5:22:00 PM Letting NB Traffic Pass

5:35:55 PM NB Traffic Hesitated5:49:26 PM Possible Confusion5:55:34 PM Peds Crossing Lower King

7:32:01 AM 7:30:35 AM Possible Confusion 7:08:32 AM7:46:19 AM 7:45:01 AM

7:52:34 AM7:54:54 AM7:59:28 AM

2:30:49 PM 2:31:46 PM SB Traffic Proceeded 2:37:36 PM2:35:23 PM 2:33:28 PM Possible Confusion 2:44:48 PM2:36:56 PM 2:34:38 PM Possible Confusion 2:46:00 PM2:37:11 PM 2:35:34 PM Letting NB & SB Traffic Pass2:37:44 PM 2:42:28 PM Letting NB Traffic Pass2:38:04 PM 2:42:40 PM Letting NB Traffic Pass2:38:16 PM* 2:46:00 PM Ped Crossing South Greeley (no x-walk)2:39:32 PM** 2:47:15 PM Appeared ped was going to cross but did not2:40:13 PM*** 2:47:50 PM Letting SB Traffic and Ped Pass

2:41:12 PM 2:48:20 PM2:41:56 PM2:42:48 PM2:43:06 PM2:44:05 PM2:44:17 PM

2:44:36 PM****2:45:15 PM2:45:39 PM2:46:10 PM2:46:47 PM2:47:22 PM

5:00:18 PM 7:01:22 AM

11:19:56 AM 11:15:04 AM Letting NB Traffic Pass 11:15:06 AM11:22:18 AM 11:17:40 AM Letting SB Traffic Pass 11:18:13 AM11:28:35 AM 11:21:12 AM Possible Confusion 11:20:10 AM

11:21:02 AM11:23:47 AM11:24:41 AM11:25:53 AM11:27:04 AM

7:11:12 AM 7:07:06 AM7:28:25 AM 7:13:48 AM7:32:00 AM 7:24:12 AM5:09:11 PM 5:00:25 PM Possible Confusion 5:11:02 PM5:18:56 PM 5:12:55 PM Possible Confusion/Letting NB Pass 5:15:11 PM

5:15:44 PM Possible Confusion 5:18:56 PM5:16:15 PM Possible Confusion5:16:46 PM Possible Confusion/Letting SB Pass

7:16:56 AM 7:11:34 AM7:29:53 AM 7:43:46 AM7:33:40 AM5:03:22 PM 5:01:30 PM Peds Crossing South Greeley (no x-walk) 5:01:30 PM5:08:03 PM 5:06:32 PM Possible Confusion 5:17:58 PM5:08:55 PM 5:09:34 PM Possible Confusion5:22:02 PM

NOTES:* A steady string of children cross between 2:38:16 PM and 2:38:22 PM** A steady string of children cross between 2:39:12 PM and 2:39:36 PM. Majority of children use three crosswalks to reach the west side of South Greeley Avenue.*** A steady string of children cross between 2:40:10 PM and 2:40:42 PM. Majority of children use three crosswalks to reach the west side of South Greeley Avenue.**** A steady string of children cross between 2:44:32 PM and 2:45:00 PM. Majority of children use three crosswalks to reach the west side of South Greeley Avenue.

12/3/2015

Traffic guard began directing traffic at 2:47:30 PM until beyond 4:00 PM. A second guard assisted for pedestrian crossing across Lower King Street from 3:03:30 PM to 3:52 PM

2:30 PM to 2:50 PM School Peak

Mid Day Peak Hour

Wednesday

Thursday

Friday

Saturday

Hamlet of Chappaqua Streetscape and Infrastructure ProjectVideo Timestamp - Sample Summary of WB Stopping Traffic and Pedestrian Crossing of South Greeley Avenue

12/9/2015

AM Peak Hour

12/8/2015 Tuesday

PM Peak Hour

Traffic guard began directing traffic intermittently at 5:02 PM until 6:00 PMPM Peak Hour

12/5/2015

12/4/2015

PM Peak Hour

AM Peak Hour

AM Peak Hour

PM Peak Hour

AM Peak Hour


February 8, 2016



February 8, 2016

Appendix D

Accident Analysis Data


February 8, 2016


Key Number DescriptionAccidents in 3 years

Predominant Accident Type Predominant Accident Contributing Factor

3 Quaker Road - Spring Road to Hunts/Douglas/Mill River 1 0.49 acc/MVM 2.25 acc/MVM Animal Illness/Driver Inattention5 Quaker Road - Hunts/Douglas/Mill River to Apex 2 0.80 acc/MVM 2.25 acc/MVM Rear End/Sideswipe Various7 South Greeley - Quaker Road to King Street 4 8.37 acc/MVM 2.25 acc/MVM Sideswipe Driver Inattention9 King Street - Greeley Avenue to Senter Street 3 8.37 acc/MVM 2.25 acc/MVM Sideswipe Turning Improperly11 King Street - Senter Street to Prospect Drive 2 1.20 acc/MVM 2.25 acc/MVM Left Turn Failure to Yield/Pedestrain Error13 King Street - Prospect Drive to Maple Avenue 3 4.19 acc/MVM 2.25 acc/MVM Right Angle Failure to Yield 29 King Street - Maple Avenue to Highland Avenue 1 1.67 acc/MVM 2.25 acc/MVM Fixed Object Reaction to Uninvolved Vehicle30 King Street - Poillon Drive to Bedford Road 1 1.20 acc/MVM 2.25 acc/MVM Sideswipe Failure to Yield21 South Greeley Avenue - Washington Avenue to Woodbine Avenue 3 8.59 acc/MVM 2.25 acc/MVM Rear End/Left Turn/Right Turn Improper Lane Use/Failure to Yield/Inattention24 South Greeley between N and S Leg of Quaker Road 1 1.67 acc/MVM 2.25 acc/MVM Sideswipe Failure to Yield25 North Greeley Avenue - King Street to Maple Avenue 10 24.34 acc/MVM 2.25 acc/MVM Sideswipe Failure to Keep Right

Key Number DescriptionAccidents in 3 years

Predominant Accident Type Predominant Accident Contributing Factor

4 Quaker Road and Hunts/Douglas/Mill River 4 0.26 acc/MEV 0.21 acc/MEV Rear End/Rt Angle/Lt Turn/SS Failure to Yield28 Quaker Road at Apex 2 0.13 acc/MEV 0.15 acc/MEV Rear End/Head On Various6 Quaker Road and South Greeley (North Leg) 10 0.84 acc/MEV 0.15 acc/MEV Rear End Following too Close/Failure to Yield8 South Greeley and North Greeley/King/Lower King 11 0.92 acc/MEV 0.15 acc/MEV Sideswipe Failure to Yield

10 King Street and Senter Street 2 0.17 acc/MEV 0.15 acc/MEV Rear End/Sideswipe Following too Close/View Obstructed12 King Street and Prospect Drive 1 0.08 acc/MEV 0.15 acc/MEV Fixed Object Reaction to Uninvolved Vehicle14 King Street and Maple Avenue 1 0.08 acc/MEV 0.15 acc/MEV Fixed Object Slippery Pavement15 King Street and Castle Road 1 0.08 acc/MEV 0.15 acc/MEV Rear End Driver Inattention16 King Street and Orchard Ridge Road 3 0.25 acc/MEV 0.15 acc/MEV Rear End Glare/Following too Close/Alcohol17 King Street and Poillon Drive 8 0.67 acc/MEV 0.26 acc/MEV Right Angle/Sideswipe Failure to Yield18 King Street and Bedford Road 3 0.25 acc/MEV 0.21 acc/MEV Rear End Following too Close19 Washington Avenue and Allen Place 1 0.28 acc/MEV 0.15 acc/MEV Left Turn Failure to Yield20 South Greeley Avenue and Washington Avenue 3 1.46 acc/MEV 0.15 acc/MEV Rear End/Left Turn/Sideswipe Failure to Yield22 South Greeley and Woodbine Avenue 3 0.19 acc/MEV 0.26 acc/MEV Right Angle/Left Turn/Sideswipe Failure to Yield23 Quaker Road and South Greeley (South Leg) 4 0.26 acc/MEV 0.15 acc/MEV Rear End/Sideswipe Various26 North Greeley and Maple Avenue 1 0.49 acc/MEV 0.15 acc/MEV Fixed Object Slippery Pavement27 North Greeley and Bischoff Avenue 1 0.49 acc/MEV 0.15 acc/MEV Sideswipe Slippery Pavement

Segment Formula:

(# of accidents in 3 years) * 1,000,000 = acc/MVM(365 days/yr) * (3 years) * (AADT veh/day) * (Segment Length)

Intersection Formula:

(# of accidents in 3 years) * 1,000,000 = acc/MEV(365 days/yr) * (3 years) * (AADT veh/day)

Computed RateStatewide Rate for

Comparable Segment

Hamlet of Chappaqua Streetscape and Improvement ProjectAccident Analysis Summary

Computed RateStatewide Rate for

Comparable Segment

Non-Intersection (Mid-Block) Accident Summary

Intersection Accident Summary

DATE TIME

#VEHICLES

ACC.

SEVERI TY

LIGHT COND

ROAD CHAR

SURFACE

WEATHER ACCIDENT DESCRIPTION

Page 1 of 2DETAILS OF ACCIDENT HISTORY

No.CONTRIB.

FACTORS TYPEKEY #

King Street

Chappaqua

Town of New Castle Westchester

ROUTE NUMBER/STREET NAME:

LOCATION:

MUNICIPALITY: COUNTY:

REFERENCE MARKERS / NODES: -

7/1/2011

6/30/2014

36

PERIOD STUDIED:

FROM:

TO:

MONTHS

1400042

King 1

BP

1/28/2016

CASE No.

FILE:

BY:

DATE:

4/9/2013 12:45 2 LtrnN/R 1 1 1 1 7 VEH 1 MADE A LEFT TURN ONTO GREELEY AVE AND HIT VEH 283 6

12/13/2013 17:30 2 LtrnN/R 4 2 1 1 7 18 VEH 2 TURNED LEFT AND FAILED TO YIELD ROW AND HITS VEH 1103 6

5/6/2013 14:50 2 RangN/R 1 1 1 1 7 VEH 2 FAILED TO YIELD RIGHT OF WAY AND HIT VEH2 AT INTERSECTION86 6

9/23/2011 7:27 2 RendN/R 1 3 2 2 9 VEH 2 REARENDED VEH 1 AT INTERSECTION58 6

4/19/2013 8:10 2 RendPDO 1 1 1 2 4 VEH 2 REARENDED VEH 1 AT INTERSECTION85 6

6/15/2013 13:05 2 RendN/R 1 2 1 1 9 VEH 2 REARENDED VEH 1. VEH 1 WAS STOPPED AT STOP SIGN91 6

7/23/2013 7:04 2 RendN/R 1 5 2 2 9 66 VEH 1 REARENDED VEH 2. VEH 2 WAS STOPPED AT STOP SIGN.93 6

8/16/2013 14:57 2 RendPDO 1 5 1 2 4 VEH 1 REARENDED VEH 2. VEH 2 WAS STOPPED FOR A PEDESTRIAN94 6

10/17/2013 15:36 2 RendN/R 1 5 1 2 3 VEH 1 BACKED INTO VEH 298 6

3/3/2012 12:29 2 SideN/R 1 1 1 1 4 60 VEH 2 HIT VEH 1'S OPEN CAR DOOR68 7

2/4/2014 12:57 2 PedN/R 1 5 2 1 4 VEH 1 STRUCK PEDESTRIAN ON PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY105 8

9/10/2011 10:58 2 RendN/R 1 5 1 1 9 VEH1 REARENDED VEH2. VEH2 WAS STOPPED AT STOP SIGN AT INTERSECT57 8

1/4/2013 16:16 2 RendINJ 1 2 1 1 9 VEH 2 REARENDED VEH 1 AT INTERSECTION79 8

3/18/2014 15:45 2 RendN/R 1 2 1 1 9 VEH 2 REARENDED VEH 1 AT INTERSECTION107 8

11/3/2011 19:26 2 SidePDO 5 1 1 1 13 4 VEH 2 TRIED TO PASS VEH 1 AND HIT VEH 160 8

8/11/2011 9:00 2 SidePDO 1 2 1 1 13 VEH 2 SIDESWIPED PARKED VEH 154 9

2/11/2014 7:37 2 SideN/R 1 2 1 1 18 VEH 2 SIDESWIPED PARKED VEH 1 WHILE ATTEMPTING TO PARK106 9

5/10/2014 11:50 2 SideN/R 1 2 1 2 18 VEH 2 MADE A U-TURN AND HIT PARKED VEH 1110 9

8/9/2011 12:35 2 RendPDO 1 2 1 2 9 VEH 1 WAS REARENDED BY VEH 253 10

5/10/2013 18:00 2 SidePDO 1 2 1 1 69 VEH 1 SIDESWIPED PARKED VEH 2 WHLIE ATTEMPTING TO PARK87 10

2/18/2012 20:40 2 LtrnN/R 4 5 2 2 7 VEH1 EXITED PARKING LOT AND COLLIDED WITH VEH 2 AT INTERSECTION67 11

11/8/2011 11:48 1 PedINJ 1 3 1 1 14 VEH 1 HIT GIRL WHO HAD RUN OUT INTO STREET62 11HSA Software 3.0

DATE TIME

#VEHICLES

ACC.

SEVERI TY

LIGHT COND

ROAD CHAR

SURFACE



No.CONTRIB.

FACTORS TYPEKEY #

King Street

Chappaqua



LOCATION:



7/1/2011

6/30/2014

36

PERIOD STUDIED:

FROM:

TO:

MONTHS

1400042

King 1

BP

1/28/2016

CASE No.

FILE:

BY:

DATE:

7/13/2013 11:53 1 FixON/R 1 2 2 2 26 4 VEH1 SWERVED TO AVOID ANOTHER CAR AND HIT POLE. VEH1 DISTRACTED92 12

9/13/2013 15:30 2 LtrnPDO 1 2 1 1 7 VEH 2 FAILED TO YIELD RIGHT OF WAY AND HIT VEH 1 UPON TURNING96 13

8/8/2011 16:17 2 RangPDO 1 5 2 3 7 VEH 2 COLLIDED WITH VEH 1 WHEN ATTEMPTING TO ENTER RT 12052 13

11/3/2011 13:12 2 RangPDO 1 5 1 1 7 VEH1 TRIED TO TURN ONTO RT120 AND DIDNT SEE VEH2 AROUND CURVE61 13

3/8/2013 6:38 1 FixON/R 1 5 4 4 66 VEH 1 WENT OFF ROADWAY AND STRUCK STONE WALL DUE TO ICE81 14

3/4/2012 14:11 2 RendPDO 1 3 1 1 4 VEH 2 REARENDED VEH 1. VEH 1 WAS STOPPED AT INTERSECTION69 15

11/30/2011 20:28 2 ParkPDO 4 2 1 1 2 VEH 1 HIT PARKED VEH 264 16

12/6/2013 18:16 4 RendINJ 4 2 2 3 VEH4 REARENDS VEH3 CAUSES VEH3 TO REAREND VEH2…SAME WITH VEH1101 16

5/30/2014 10:36 2 RendPDO 1 2 1 1 9 62 VEH 1 REARENDED VEH 2 DUE TO SUN GLARE. VEH 2 WAS STOPPED.111 16

6/27/2014 11:05 2 HdOnPDO 1 3 1 1 13 18 VEH 2 TURNS LEFT AND VEH 1 HITS FRONT OF VEH 2113 17

4/19/2012 16:30 2 LtrnN/R 1 2 1 1 7 VEH 1 HIT VEH 2 WHILE EXITING THE PARKING LOT72 17

1/22/2013 7:47 1 PedINJ 1 3 1 1 62 7 VEH 1 STRUCK PEDESTRIAN. VEH 1 DRIVER STATED SEVERE SUN GLARE80 17

10/7/2011 16:59 2 RangPDO 1 3 1 1 7 VEH 2 WAS EXITING PARKING LOT WHEN IT HIT VEH 159 17

12/22/2012 17:06 2 RangPDO 3 2 1 2 7 VEH 2 PULLED OUT OF A DRIVEWAY AND COLLIDED WITH VEH 178 17

5/13/2013 15:33 2 RendPDO 1 1 1 1 4 9 VEH 1 REARENDED STOPPED VEH 2. VEH 2 WAS TURNING LEFT88 17

12/13/2013 16:39 2 SidePDO 3 1 1 2 7 VEH 2 EXITED PARKING SPOT AND COLLIDED WITH PASSING VEH 1102 17

1/21/2014 9:27 2 SidePDO 1 1 1 2 4 VEH 2 SIDESWIPED VEH 1 WHLIE TRYING TO PARK104 17

3/20/2012 14:44 2 LtrnN/R 1 2 1 1 7 VEH 2 HIT VEH 1 WHILE TRYING TO TURN ONTO RT 11770 18

8/1/2011 7:51 2 RendPDO 1 1 1 1 9 VEH 1 TURNING RIGHT ONTO RT117 WHEN STRUCK IN REAR BY VEH 251 18

10/6/2012 14:24 2 RendN/R 1 5 1 1 9 VEH 2 REARENDED VEH 1 AT YIELD SIGN77 18

6/8/2013 16:13 1 FixOPDO 1 5 1 2 26 VEH 1 SWERVED TO AVOID ANOTHER CAR AND ENDED UP HITTING A POLE90 29

6/16/2014 18:19 2 SidePDO 1 1 1 1 7 VEH 1 CRASHED INTO VEH 2'S SUDDEN OPEN DOOR112 30HSA Software 3.0

DATE TIME

#VEHICLES

ACC.

SEVERI TY

LIGHT COND

ROAD CHAR

SURFACE



No.CONTRIB.

FACTORS TYPEKEY #

King Street

Chappaqua



LOCATION:



7/1/2011

6/30/2014

36

PERIOD STUDIED:

FROM:

TO:

MONTHS

1400042

King 2

BP

1/28/2016

CASE No.

FILE:

BY:

DATE:

9/14/2012 17:50 2 LtrnPDO 1 1 1 1 7 VEH 2 HIT VEH 1 WHILE TURNING ON TO GREELEY AVE17 6

5/6/2013 14:50 2 RangN/R 1 1 1 1 7 VEH 2 HIT VEH 1 AS IT FAILED TO YIELD RIGHT OF WAY AT INTERSECT32 6

5/5/2013 12:53 2 RangINJ 1 1 1 1 11 VEH 1 HIT PARKED VEH 2 AND BUILDING AS IT ENTERED INTERSECTION31 7

1/10/2014 18:37 2 SidePDO 4 1 2 3 13 4 VEH 1 HIT PARKED VEH 244 7

5/6/2014 16:05 2 SideN/R 1 1 1 1 18 VEH 2 HIT PARKED VEH 1 AS VEH 2 TRIED TO PARK49 7

1/25/2013 16:15 2 RangN/R 1 1 1 1 7 VEH 1 AND VEH 2 COLLIDED AT INTERSECTION, VEH2 HAD RIGHT OF WAY23 8

3/2/2012 15:32 2 SidePDO 1 1 1 1 4 4 VEH 2 HIT PARKED VEH 1'S DOOR AS VEH 1 DRIVER WAS LEAVING CAR9 8

4/30/2012 11:40 2 SideN/R 1 1 1 1 7 VEH 2 HIT VEH 1 WHILE LEAVING PARKING SPOT AND LEFT SCENE12 8

6/8/2012 9:45 2 SidePDO 1 1 1 1 18 VEH 1 SIDESWIPED PARKED VEH 2 AS VEH 1 TRIED TO PARK13 8

10/23/2012 15:48 2 SidePDO 1 1 2 3 7 VEH 1 HIT VEH 2'S OPEN DOOR20 8

3/9/2013 8:50 2 SidePDO 1 1 1 1 7 VEH 2 HIT PARKED VEH 1'S OPEN CAR DOOR27 8

2/3/2012 16:58 2 SidePDO 1 1 1 1 7 VEH 2 HIT VEH 1 AS VEH 1 EXITED PARKING SPACE7 24

HSA Software 3.0

DATE TIME

#VEHICLES

ACC.

SEVERI TY

LIGHT COND

ROAD CHAR

SURFACE



No.CONTRIB.

FACTORS TYPEKEY #

Quaker Road

Chappaqua



LOCATION:



7/1/2011

6/30/2014

36

PERIOD STUDIED:

FROM:

TO:

MONTHS

1400042

Quaker 1

BP

1/28/2016

CASE No.

FILE:

BY:

DATE:

12/6/2011 11:03 1 AnmlPDO 1 2 1 2 4 10 VEH 1 SWERVED TO AVOID A DEER AND HIT A MAILBOX65 3

3/15/2013 9:03 2 LtrnN/R 1 4 1 1 7 VEH 1 TRIED TO MAKE A LEFT TURN ONTO RT120 AND HIT VEH 282 4

11/26/2011 21:39 2 RangINJ 4 2 1 1 17 17 VEH1 HIT VEH2 AT INTERSECTION.BOTH BELIEVED THEY HAD GREEN LIGH63 4

6/15/2012 8:00 3 RendPDO 1 1 1 1 9 VEH 1 REARENDED VEH 2 CAUSING VEH 2 TO HIT VEH 3 IN FRONT OF IT74 4

4/9/2013 20:09 2 SideN/R 4 2 1 1 7 7 VEH 2 TRIED TO TURN LEFT ON TO RT120 AND COLLIDED WITH VEH 184 4

10/20/2013 15:25 2 RendPDO 1 3 1 1 3 VEH 2 BACKED INTO VEH 1 WHO WAS STOPPED IN TRAFFIC99 5

7/6/2011 14:24 2 SidePDO 1 2 1 1 13 27 VEH 1 SIDESWIPED VEH 2 AS HE TRIED TO AVOID REARENDING ANOTHER50 5

11/22/2013 17:35 2 RendPDO 4 5 2 3 9 66 VEH 1 REARENDED VEH 2100 23

9/26/2013 15:01 3 HdOnPDO 1 5 1 2 11 VEH1 REARENDED VEH2 DUE TO MEDICAL CONDITION & BACKED INTO VEH397 28

6/11/2012 17:29 3 RendINJ 1 2 1 1 2 9 VEH1 HIT STOPPED VEH1 AT INTERSECT. VEH1 DRIVER WAS INTOXICATED73 28

HSA Software 3.0

DATE TIME

#VEHICLES

ACC.

SEVERI TY

LIGHT COND

ROAD CHAR

SURFACE



No.CONTRIB.

FACTORS TYPEKEY #

Quaker Road

Chappaqua



LOCATION:



7/1/2011

6/30/2014

36

PERIOD STUDIED:

FROM:

TO:

MONTHS

1400042

Quaker 2

BP

1/28/2016

CASE No.

FILE:

BY:

DATE:

6/6/2014 17:28 2 LtrnPDO 1 1 1 1 7 VEH 1 TURNED ONTO GREELEY FROM PARKING LOT AND HIT VEH 250 22

2/14/2013 19:31 2 RangINJ 4 1 2 2 7 VEH 2 AND VEH 1 COLLIDED AT INTERSECTION, VEH 2 ENTERED STREET24 22

10/13/2012 11:29 3 SideN/R 1 1 1 1 13 VEH 1 AND VEH 2 SIDESWIPED AND VEH 1 HIT PARKED VEH 319 22

10/17/2013 15:36 2 RendN/R 1 5 1 2 3 VEH 1 WAS BACKING UP AND HIT VEH 2 WHO WAS TURNING ONTO GREELEY40 23

9/24/2012 14:42 2 SidePDO 1 1 1 1 26 VEH 1 HIT VEH 2 WHILE PULLING ASIDE FOR PASSING AMBULANCE18 23

4/13/2013 10:54 2 SidePDO 1 1 1 1 18 VEH 1 HIT PARKED VEH 2 AS VEH 1 WAS TRYING TO PARK28 23

HSA Software 3.0

DATE TIME

#VEHICLES

ACC.

SEVERI TY

LIGHT COND

ROAD CHAR

SURFACE



No.CONTRIB.

FACTORS TYPEKEY #

North Greeley Avenue

Chappaqua



LOCATION:



7/1/2011

6/30/2014

36

PERIOD STUDIED:

FROM:

TO:

MONTHS

1400042

N Greeley Ave

BP

1/28/2016

CASE No.

FILE:

BY:

DATE:

1/29/2012 11:23 2 HdOnPDO 1 1 1 1 27 VEH 2 HIT PARKED VEH 1 AFTER OTHER VEH CAME INTO VEH 2'S LANE6 25

7/25/2011 8:50 2 ParkPDO 1 1 1 1 7 VEH 1 TRAVELING SOUTH ON N GREELEY HIT VEH 2'S OPEN CAR DOOR1 25

3/2/2012 9:43 2 SidePDO 1 1 2 13 VEH 2 HIT VEH 1 WHILE TRYING TO PARK IN FRONT OF VEH 18 25

4/23/2013 18:18 2 SideINJ 1 1 1 1 7 VEH 2 GOT OUT OF PARKING SPOT AND STRUCK PASSING VEH 129 25

6/21/2013 13:23 2 SidePDO 1 1 1 1 4 VEH 1 (TRUCK) HIT VEH 2 WHILE DRIVING DOWN NARROW ROAD34 25

7/20/2013 14:00 2 SideN/R 1 1 1 2 13 VEH 1 HIT PARKED VEH 236 25

8/29/2013 19:30 2 SidePDO 3 1 1 2 3 VEH 1 WAS BACKING OUT AND HIT PARKED VEH 237 25

12/6/2013 12:40 2 SideN/R 1 1 2 2 27 VEH 2 SIDESWIPED VEH 1 WHILE TALKING ON HER CELL PHONE42 25

12/18/2013 16:15 2 SideN/R 3 1 2 1 27 27 VEH 2 SIDESWIPED VEH 143 25

4/14/2014 11:10 2 SideN/R 1 1 1 2 18 VEH 1 HIT PARKED VEH 2 AS VEH 1 WAS TRYING TO PARK48 25

11/7/2012 16:39 1 FixOPDO 3 2 4 4 66 VEH 1 SLID OFF ROAD DOWN THE HILL DUE TO ICE AND HIT STONE WALL21 26

12/29/2012 15:57 3 SidePDO 3 2 4 4 66 VEH 1 LEFT ROADWAY AND HIT PARKED VEHICLES 2 AND 322 27

HSA Software 3.0

DATE TIME

#VEHICLES

ACC.

SEVERI TY

LIGHT COND

ROAD CHAR

SURFACE



No.CONTRIB.

FACTORS TYPEKEY #

South Greeley Avenue

Chappaqua



LOCATION:



7/1/2011

6/30/2014

36

PERIOD STUDIED:

FROM:

TO:

MONTHS

1400042

S Greeley Ave

BP

1/28/2016

CASE No.

FILE:

BY:

DATE:

6/15/2012 18:25 2 LtrnPDO 1 1 1 1 7 69 VEH 2 HIT VEH 1 ON GREELEY AVE WHILE LEAVING LIBRARY14 20

2/16/2013 23:12 2 RendN/R 4 2 1 1 50 VEH 2 ROLLED INTO VEH 1 AT INTERSECTION25 20

10/29/2013 14:13 2 SidePDO 1 1 1 2 7 VEH 1 FAILED TO YIELD RIGHT OF WAY AND HIT VEH 241 20

6/20/2012 13:44 2 LtrnPDO 1 1 1 1 7 VEH 2 HIT VEH 1 ON GREELEY AVE AS VEH 2 TURNED INTO THE AVENUE15 21

2/6/2014 18:34 2 RendN/R 4 1 2 2 4 VEH 2 STUCK REAR OF VEH 1 IN STOP AND GO TRAFFIC45 21

3/14/2014 7:18 2 RtrnPDO 1 1 1 1 13 VEH1 HIT VEH2 AS HE TRIED TO PASS VEH2. VEH2 WAS TURNING RIGHT47 21

HSA Software 3.0

DATE TIME

#VEHICLES

ACC.

SEVERI TY

LIGHT COND

ROAD CHAR

SURFACE



No.CONTRIB.

FACTORS TYPEKEY #

Washington Avenue

Chappaqua



LOCATION:



7/1/2011

6/30/2014

36

PERIOD STUDIED:

FROM:

TO:

MONTHS

1400042

Washington Ave

BP

1/28/2016

CASE No.

FILE:

BY:

DATE:

5/20/2014 14:54 2 LtrnN/R 1 1 1 1 7 VEH 2 FAILED TO YIELD RIGHT OF WAY, LEFT LOT, AND HIT VEH 150 19

HSA Software 3.0

Documents

Hamlet of Chappaqua, Town of New Castle, NY · However, WSP also prepared VISSIM models for the Downtown Hamlet traffic network while investigating an alternative “triangular roundabout”