Loading...
alta_inventory_report_20180118PUBLIC SIDEWALK INVENTORY ANALYSIS REPORT JANUARY 2018 DD D D D ### # D D DD D DD DDD D DD #D D DD ## DD "hDDD"h "hD DD DD"h D D D D"h DD D DDDD DDDDD D DD DDDDDD DDDDDD"h"hDDDD#DD DDDD## "hD D DDD ##DDDD ### D"h "hD"h "hDDDDDDDD#DD "hD # # "h "hD D # # D"hD"h D DDDDDDDDD#DDDDDDDDDDDDD"hDDDDDDDDD# DD DD D # # #DD ## DD D DDD #DD #D#DD #DDD DD"hDDDDDD DD#"h"hD # DDD DD"hDD DDDDDDDDD DDDDDDDDDDD#DD#D #D # DDDD ###D#DDDD#DDD"h#D"hD## DDD D"h DDD"hDDDD"h DDDDD DD DDDDD DDDDDDDD DDD D DDDD"h"hD D DD DD DD #DD D"h D DD D # D#DD D D #DDDDDD DDD"h# D#DD DD D "h DD## D D D D D D DDDD D DD DD #D DD D DD DD DD D D D# #DD DDDD #D D#DD D D D D #### DD ## "hD DD D DD DD DD # D D#"h DD#DDDDDDDD D DD DDD DD D ## D DD# D DD DD # D DD D "h # D D D# D D "hD DD DD D DD # # DD D D # DD DD DD # "h D ## D DD DD #D D D DD #D# D D "hD D DDDD DD D "hD D D D D D D # D D DD D D D # D D D # D D D D # D D # D # D D D "h "h "h D## "h"h D # D D DD D D# D D D D "hD D D D D DD D# DDD D D #DD DD D D D D D D D D # DD D D D D D D DD DD DD D # # D # D D D D D D DD D D D # D "h D D # # D"h DD D D "h# D # # D # "hDD D D D D D D D "h D DD D D D DDD DD D D # # # D D D "h "h D D D D "h D D D # D ##D D D # D DD#DD DD DDDD###D DDDD#D # DD D D DDD D DDD D D D D # D##DD D D DD D D D DD # D D D D D D D DD D D ## #D D DDD "hDDD D D D D # D # D D D "h # D D # D # D D D D # ## D D D D # D D DD "h DD D D D D D #"h DD D "h D D # D D DD D # D D D D # # # D D D D D D D D D D # "h ## D D D D D D "h # D D D # "h D# D #D D D D D D # D ## # D D D # DD D D D D D # D # D "hD D "h D D D # D"h D DDD D D "h D # # #D DDD ##D DDDDDDDD #D#DD "h "h D DD DD D# D D DDD DD DD D D"hD"h"h D DD D D "h D "h D D DD D D D D DD D "h D D # D D D "hD D D D # # D D D "h D D "h D D DD DD # "h D D # D D D D D D D D D D UV66 UV9 UV10 UV9 £¤5 §¨¦91 §¨¦91 EDocument Path: N:\GIS_Projects\Projects\Public\MXD\ADA_ramp_study_20190208.mxdDate Saved: 2/8/2019 1:50:28 PM ramps 2017 ADA Compliant Status "h COMPLIANT #NO RAMP D NON-COMPLIANT ### # # ## # #### ### # # # # # # # # # # # # #### # # ## # # ##### # ## # ### # # ## # # # # # ## ## ## # # ### # # # # # # # # ### ## # # # # # ## # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # ### # # ## # # ## ## # ## # # # # ## # ## # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # UV66 UV9 UV10 UV9 £¤5 §¨¦91§¨¦91MI M MI I I I EDocument Path: N:\GIS_Projects\Projects\Public\MXD\ADA_ramp_study_20190208.mxdDate Saved: 3/29/2019 5:00:00 PM ADA Compliant Status #NO RAMP CB_Florence_GB_buffer_1_mile elem_school_buffer_1_mile MassCentral New Haven & Northampton unassigned Environmental Justice 2010 Populations EJ Criteria, by Block Group Minority Income Minority and Income DD D D D D D D D DD D DD D DD D D DD DD DDD D DD DD D D D D DD D DDDD DDDDD D DD DDDDD D DDDDD DDDD D DD DDDD D D DDDDD D DDDDDDDD DD D D D DD D DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD DD DD D DD DD D DD D DD DDD DDDDDDDDDDDDDD DDDDDDDDDDDDD DDDDDDDDDDD DD D D DDDD D DDDD DDD DD DDD D DDDDDDD D DDDD DD DDDDD D DDDD DDD DDD D DDDDD D DD DD DD DD D D DD D DDDD D DDD DDD DDD DDD DD D DD D D D D D D DDDD D DD DD D DD D D D D DD DDDD D D DD D D D D DD D DD D DD DD DD D D DDDD DD DDDD D DD DD D DD D D DD D DD DD D D D D D D D D D D DD DD D DDDD D D DD DD DD D D DD DD D D D DD D D D D D DDDD DD D D D D D D D D D DD D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D DD D D D D D D D D D D DD D D DD D D DD DD D D D D D D D D DD D D D D D D DD DD DD D D D D D D D D DD D D D D D D D DD D D D D DD D D D D D D D D DD D D D D DD D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D DD DDDD DD DDDD D DD DD D DD D D DDD D D DD D D D D D DD D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D DD D D D D DDD DDD D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D DD D D D D D D D DD D D D D D DD D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D DDD D D D D D DDDDDDD D D DD D DD DD D D D DDD DD D D D DD D DD D D D D D DD D D D D DD D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D DD DD D D D D D D D D D D D D UV66 UV9 UV10 UV9 £¤5 §¨¦91§¨¦91MI M MI I I I EDocument Path: N:\GIS_Projects\Projects\Public\MXD\ADA_ramp_study_20190208.mxdDate Saved: 3/29/2019 5:00:00 PM ADA Compliant Status D NON-COMPLIANT CB_Florence_GB_buffer_1_mile elem_school_buffer_1_mile MassCentral New Haven & Northampton unassigned Environmental Justice 2010 Populations EJ Criteria, by Block Group Minority Income Minority and Income CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION..................................................1 »1.1 Project Approach.............................................1 »1.2 Methodology....................................................2 CHAPTER 2: EXISTING SIDEWALK INVENTORY..............4 »2.1 Sidewalk Scoring.............................................4 »2.2 Pedestrian Curb Ramps.................................8 »2.3 Motor Vehicle Curb Cuts..............................12 CHAPTER 3: RECOMMENDED REPAIRS + RECONSTRUCTION..................................................................16 »3.1 Prioritization Step One................................16 »3.2 Prioritization Step Two................................16 CHAPTER 4: SIDEWALK GAPS.............................................24 »4.1 Prioritization of New Sidewalks................26 APPENDIX »Appendix 1: Sidewalk, Pedestrian Curb Ramp, and Motor Vehicle Curb Cut Measurements »Appendix 2: Priority Project Cost Estimate and Unit Cost Table »Appendix 3: GA Tech Sidewalk and Ramp Condition Data Collection and Analysis Report »Appendix 4: Detailed Condition Maps »Appendix 5: Existing Sidewalk Condition Score Tables and Sidewalk Gaps Tables FIGURES 1.1 - Sidewalk Sentry Wheelchair Photo.............................................2 1.2 - Tiered Geographic Area Map.........................................................3 2.1 - Existing Sidewalk Inventory Map: Citywide...........................5 2.2 - Six Inventory Elements Photos with Captions.....................6 2.3 - Condition Score By Number Of Sidewalks And Tier..........7 2.4 - Condition Score By Number of Miles And Tier.....................7 2.5 - Non-Compliant Pedestrian Curb Ramp Photo.....................8 2.6 - Pedestrian Curb Ramp Con-Compliance Elements..........8 2.7 - Top Four Reasons for Ramp Non-Compliance.....................8 2.8 - Compliant Pedestrian Curb Ramp Photo................................8 2.9 - Pedestrian Curb Ramp Map: Citywide......................................9 2.10 - Pedestrian Curb Ramp Map: Downtown............................10 2.11 - Pedestrian Curb Ramp Map: Florence...................................11 2.12 - Motor Vehicle Curb Cuts Compliance Bar Chart.............12 2.13 - Finn St Motor Vehicle Curb Cut Photo...................................12 2.14 - Motor Vehicle Curb Cuts Map: Citywide..............................13 2.15 - Motor Vehicle Curb Cuts Map: Downtown.........................14 2.16 - Motor Vehicle Curb Cuts Map: Florence...............................15 3.1 - Sidewalk Repair Prioritization Map: Tier 1...............................17 3.2 - Sidewalk Repair Prioritization Map: Tier 2..............................18 3.3 - Sidewalk Repair Prioritization Map: Tier 3..............................19 3.4 - Sidewalk Repair Prioritization Map: Tier 4..............................20 3.5 - Prioritized Segments Map: Tier 1.................................................21 3.6 - Prioritized Segments Map: Tier 2................................................22 4.1 - Existing Sidewalk Gaps Map: Citywide....................................26 4.2 - Cumulative Sidewalk Miles Chart...............................................26 4.3 - Tier A - D Sidewalk Gap Examples............................................26 4.4 - Sidewalk Gaps Map: Tier A..............................................................27 4.5 - Sidewalk Gaps Map: Tier B..............................................................28 4.6 - Sidewalk Gaps Map: Tier C..............................................................29 4.7 - Sidewalk Gaps Map: Tier D..............................................................30 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLES 2.1 - Sidewalks by Tier..............................................................4 2.2 - Condition Score................................................................6 3.1 - Tier 1 Sidewalks for Repair.........................................21 3.2 - Tier 2 Sidewalks for Repair........................................22 4.1 - Number and Length of Gap by Tier.....................26 ii Providing safe and accessible pedestrian routes in Northampton helps to encourage residents to choose walking or public transit as a healthy and sustainable mode of transportation. From a pedestrian connectivity and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessibility point of view, Northampton’s sidewalk network is relatively complete downtown, in the adjacent historic neighborhoods and along the radial road network extending away from downtown. Most sidewalks on residential streets are buffered from the adjacent roads by grass strips. However, many residential streets lack a sidewalk on one side, with others lacking sidewalks entirely. Downtown, the retail environment and generous sidewalks along Main Street and the adjacent side streets create a strong sense of place, drawing shoppers, diners and music lovers from throughout the region. 1.1 Project Approach The intent of this study was to document the public sidewalk network throughout Northampton, including pedestrian curb ramps and motor vehicle curb cuts. Sidewalks along state-owned and private roadways or within private parking lots were excluded from this project. Alta Planning + Design oversaw the study and retained researchers at the Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech) to collect sidewalk, pedestrian curb ramp, and motor vehicle curb cut asset inventory CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION data. Georgia Tech used proprietary data-gathering methods and technology to collect and process condition data using Sidewalk Scout and Sidewalk Sentry smartphone and tablet applications. An extensive and detailed inventory was collected in order to determine the level of need for improved pedestrian connectivity and accessibility for those with disabilities. The project team’s work included an inventory of: • Existing sidewalks • Gaps in the sidewalk network • Pedestrian curb ramps • Motor vehicle curb cuts The criteria used in the data-gathering process to evaluate sidewalk infrastructure repairs included: • Width, and slope of sidewalk »Existing sidewalks below 48” wide are more likely to be repaired than wider sidewalks. »Sidewalks with a cross slope of greater than 4% are more likely to be repaired than flatter sidewalks. 1 • Potholes, obstructions, debris, and unevenness of sidewalk »Sidewalks with rough, bumpy, and/or uneven surfaces are more likely to be repaired than smoother sidewalks. Priority has been given to Northampton’s business districts and schools for sidewalk reconstruction and repair. This is due to the high pedestrian volumes and demand in Northampton’s two primary business districts and the need to improve safety and accessibility for children and staff at the following public schools: • Leeds Elementary School • Jackson Street Elementary School • RK Finn Ryan Elementary School • Bridge Street Elementary School • J.F.K. Middle School • Northampton High School • Smith Vocational and Agricultural High School 1.2 Methodology The following section describes the methodology used to create and evaluate the existing sidewalk, pedestrian curb ramp, and motor vehicle curb cut inventory, and provides a map showing the different tiers used to prioritize existing sidewalks. The two steps needed to create a pedestrian-friendly and ADA-compliant sidewalk network include: • Develop a sidewalk infrastructure database to catalog existing conditions. • Assess the conditions of the sidewalks, pedestrian curb ramps, and motor vehicle curb cuts through field work using proprietary tools and research methods to populate the database and subsequently prioritize improvements. The data collection process involved two methods developed by Georgia Tech: Figure 1.1: The Sidewalk Sentry data collection system utilized a tablet which recorded rolling video along with tilt and vibration information. • Sidewalk Scout Application - Smart phones utilizing the Sidewalk Scout application to photograph and record specific field measurements along sidewalks, pedestrian curb ramps and vehicle curb cuts. This includes parameters such as cross-slope, passing width, and presence of detectable warning surfaces to determine ADA compliance. • Sidewalk Sentry - A tablet computer mounted to a standard wheelchair using the Sidewalk Sentry application to record video, measure vibration/ roughness, obstructions, potholes, and identify maintenance issues and other obstructions that included Global Positioning System (GPS) location information. The wheelchair was pushed at regular walking pace down every public sidewalk in Northampton. Using these two methods, a team of researchers were deployed to collect the data. Researchers identified ramp locations throughout Northampton, classified ramps by type, and recorded the features of the ramp. Georgia Tech graduate students then post-processed Sidewalk Sentry video to develop sidewalk problem reports. Each sidewalk problem report identified during the video review process included locational information that was brought into the Geographic Information System* (GIS) maps for display. Following the data collection and processing, planners and graduate students from the Alta / Georgia Tech team implemented a quality assurance/quality control process to review the data, correct any discrepancies, and begin the mapping process. Alta staff then completed the prioritization process. Using GIS map layers provided by the City of Northampton, Alta and Georgia Tech were able to build lines and points into the database to represent different point data including motor vehicle curb cuts, pedestrian curb ramps, and line data, including existing and missing sidewalks. *GIS is a digital mapping system that allows users to capture, store, manipulate, analyze, and present spatially accurate data. GIS information, maps, and analysis is a common tool used by professionals in planning, engineering, land management, transportation, and the telecommunications industry.2 Sidewalk Segments The GIS information collected by Georgia Tech included 8,501 segments, each 50 feet in length. Data collectors also inventoried 4,201 sidewalk / width / slope / curb inspection reports. 2,467 of the sidewalk segments have excessive slopes or widths too narrow for a wheelchair to traverse. These data sets were then combined into more user-friendly, block-long length segments of varying lengths by combining each abutting line, and ending each line at an intersection. The resulting 752 individual lines represented existing sidewalks with a variety of existing conditions in the data. There were 2,250 sidewalk defects recorded. The sidewalk data was then analyzed, scored, and grouped into the following tiered buffers for reconstruction prioritization: • TIER 1: Within 1/4 mile of the 7 public schools • TIER 2: Within 1/4 mile of Downtown Northampton and Florence Center • TIER 3: Between 1/4 - 1/2 mile of the business districts and all schools • TIER 4: All segments falling outside of Tiers 1 - 3 Figure 1.2: Tiered Geographic Area Map Pedestrian Curb Ramps Data was collected for 1,042 pedestrian curb ramps in the City. See Map Figures 2.9 through 2.11. There are currently 77 compliant and 797 non-compliant pedestrian curb ramps. 168 locations were recorded as missing pedestrian curb ramps entirely. 505 ramp locations were missing tactile warning strips. The installation of standard tactile warning strips at these locations would very likely bring the pedestrian ramp into ADA compliance. Motor Vehicle Curb Cuts Data was collected for 3,041 motor vehicle curb cuts throughout Northampton. Every curb cut that crosses a public pedestrian right of way was measured. This includes both driveways to private residences, retail, and commercial buildings, in addition to driveways to public municipal parking lots and parks. Driveways on gravel roads and driveways that do not cross any public sidewalks were excluded from the data gathering process. 2,990 motor vehicle curb cuts had ADA deficiencies. See Map Figures 2.14 through 2.16. HADLEY HATFIELD EASTHAMPTON WILLIAMSBURG SOUTH HADLEY HOLYOKE WESTHAMPTON SOUTHAMPTON Ryan RdBridge Rd Burts Pit Rd Elm St N King StFlorence RdKing StSylvester RdS p r i n g S t N M a i n S tKennedy RdMt Tom RdN Elm StSouth StBridge StNook RdRiver RdReservoir RdA u d u b o n R d State StPleasant StRiverside Dr Prospec t S t H o c k a n u m R d Da m o n R d Easthampton RdRocky Hill Rd Locust S t Old Springeld RdFair StMain StPine St Hunts RdWest StW Farms RdHigh St Grove St Co n z S tOak StS M a i n S t Jackson StRi v e r b a n k R d Old Wilson Rd Meadow S t Ly m a n R d Florenc e S t Hateld StC u r t i s N o o k R d Drury LnVernon StCardinal WayBliss StRick D r Overlook D r H aw l e y S tRound Hill RdFor t S t In d u s t r i a l D r Greenleaf DrDunphy DrClark StPrince St Northampton StBirch LnDimock StMontague RdBrookwood D r Burts Pit Rd Main Stn n n n n n n n n n n n n n 21 Miles N0 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 1 3 The existing sidewalk inventory was the first step in the sidewalk reconstruction and repair prioritization process. Figure 2.1 shows the existing sidewalk network in Northampton. The Alta / Georgia Tech team mapped and recorded data for every public sidewalk in Northampton. The bar charts in Figures 2.3 and 2.4 provide a summary of the existing sidewalk network in Northampton. The following section describes and displays how each sidewalk segment was scored to determine its eligibility for reconstruction and/or repair. Subsequent sections describe and display the existing pedestrian curb ramp and motor vehicle curb cut conditions throughout Northampton. 2.1 Sidewalk Scoring The prioritization process included the investigation of sidewalk segments that had Conditional Scores above an acceptable level of disrepair. Upon review of sidewalk scores, Alta concluded that the vast majority of sidewalks that scored a 16 or below were in the range of perfect to acceptable condition. Therefore, it was determined that prioritizing segments with a score of 17 and above would yield the desired outcome. The following four Tiers were developed by City staff to organize and prioritize recommended sidewalk repairs. »TIER 1: Within 1/4 mile of the 7 public schools »TIER 2: Within 1/4 mile of Downtown Northampton and Florence Center »TIER 3: Between 1/4 - 1/2 mile of the business districts and all schools »TIER 4: All segments falling outside of Tiers 1 - 3 Table 2.1 displays the total number of sidewalks by Tier. Conditional Scoring Process Table 2.2 describes the process used to calculate the Condition Score of each sidewalk segment before the segments were grouped into each of the geographic Tiers. The condition scoring process included combining data from the Sidewalk Sentry and Sidewalk Scout data recording devices and adding a multiplier to emphasize the more significant defects. Of the dozens of data points collected for each sidewalk segment, the following six inventory elements were chosen to determine the overall sidewalk Condition Score (see Figure 2.2 on pg. 6): • Cross Slope • Width • Potholes CHAPTER TWO: EXISTING SIDEWALK INVENTORY TOTAL NUMBER OF NUMBER SIDEWALKS BY TIER Tier Number of Sidewalks Within Tier Miles Within Tier* 1**131 17.4 2**143 13.4 3**382 45.1 4 199 22.4 Table 2.1: Sidewalks by Tier • Obstructions • Debris • Uneven Surfaces *Sidewalk segments were not ‘clipped’ at the buffer boundary line, therefore a handful of segments may be repeated within this column. **Tiers 1, 2, and 3 have 102 overlapping or duplicate sidewalk segments. There are 752 total sidewalk segments.4 CHAPTER TWO: EXISTING SIDEWALK INVENTORY Ryan RdBridge Rd Burts Pit Rd Elm S t N King StFlorence RdKing StSylvester RdS p r i n g S t N M a i n S tKennedy RdMt Tom RdN Elm StSouth StBridge StNook RdRiver RdReservoir RdA u d u b o n R d State StPleasant StRiverside Dr Prospe c t S t H o c k a n u m R d Da m o n R d Easthampton RdRocky Hill Rd Locust S t Old Springeld RdFair StMain StPine St Hunts RdWest StW Farms RdHigh St Grove St Co n z S tOak StS M a i n S t Jackson StRi v e r b a n k R d Old Wilson Rd Meadow S t Ly m a n R d Florenc e S t Hateld StC u r t i s N o o k R d Drury LnVernon StCardinal WayBliss StRick D r Overlook D r H aw l e y S tRound Hill RdFor t S t In d u s t r i a l D r Greenleaf DrDunphy DrClark StPrince St Northampton StBirch LnDimock StMontague RdBrookwood D r Main Stn n n n n n n 21 Miles N0 Figure 2.1: Existing Sidewalk Inventory - Citywide Legend Existing Sidewalk Network Schooln State Highway 5 This segment along Conz Street includes utility pole obstructions that narrow the sidewalk width to less than 3’ in places. Image: Google. A segment along Prospect Ave that registered the highest pothole count, creating a challenging environment for those with limited mobility. Image: Google. A sidewalk with significant uneven surfaces on Federal Street, rendering the segment non- compliant with ADA standards. Image: Google. Sidewalk with significant debris in the form of vegetation encroachment, making the sidewalk inaccessible for wheelchairs. Image: screen shot from the rolling wheelchair tablet video. A segment of sidewalk that exceeds the ADA- accessible 2% maximum cross slope. Image: Google. A narrow sidewalk segment on Hinckley Street that does not meet ADA requirements. Image: Google. OBSTRUCTIONS POTHOLES UNEVEN SURFACESDEBRIS CROSS SLOPE Figure 2.2: Six Inventory Elements used to determine Condition Scores WIDTH In addition to the Condition Score, another scoring metric was developed that factored in the length of the sidewalk segment. (Note: the length of the sidewalk segment in question does not alter the Condition Score.) The resulting equation divided the Condition Score by the length of the segment and multiplied the result by 1,000 in order to create a more manageable number (rather than small decimals). See the right-most column labeled ‘Pro-Rated’ in Tables 3.1 & 3.2. This pro-rated value can be used to compare segments to determine which segments have more defects per foot. However, due to the equation favoring shorter segments, this is a supplementary value to the Condition Score. In addition to the significant data recorded for each sidewalk, gaps in the sidewalk network (i.e. missing sidewalks) were identified and are discussed in more detail in Chapter 4. Table 2.2 displays the six Inventory Elements used to generate the Condition Score. The bar charts in Figures 2.3 and 2.4 provide a summary of the existing sidewalks with a Condition Score equal to or above 17 in each Tier. CONDITION SCORE Inventory Element Used to Generate Condition Score Potholes Obstruction Debris Uneven Width Cross Slope No Value None None None None >60”<2% Score: 1 1-8 1-6 1-3 1-30 >=48” - <60”>2% - <=3% Score: 2 9-16 7-12 4-6 31-60 <48”>3 - <=4% Score: 3 >16 >12 7-9 >60 n/a >4% Weighting*x 4 x 3 x 1 x 4 x 2 x 4 *Weighting was determined by City of Northampton staff. Table 2.2: Condition Score Inventory Elements 6 TIER 1TIER 2TIER 3TIER 4ALLNUMBER OF SIDEWALKS 112 31 Total: 143 294 88 Total: 382 157 42 Total: 199 595 157 Total: 752 22 Total: 130108 Total: 100 <17 >=17 BLUE IS A CONDITION SCORE OF <17 RED IS A CONDITION SCORE OF >=17 LEGEND 50 50 TIER 1TIER 2TIER 3TIER 4ALLNUMBER OF MILES 4.8 Total: 17.4 Total: 20 12.6 9 4.4 Total: 13.4 29.7 15.4 Total: 45.1 Total: 22.46.316.1 57.4 26.1 Total: 83.5 <17 >=17 1010 ORANGE IS A CONDITION SCORE OF <17 GREEN IS A CONDITION SCORE OF >=17 LEGEND Figure 2.3: Condition Score Breakdown By Number Of Sidewalks And Tier Figure 2.4: Condition Score Breakdown By Sidewalk Miles And Tier BAR CHART NOTES »TIER 1: Within 1/4 mile of the seven public schools »TIER 2: Within 1/4 mile of Downtown Northampton and Florence Center »TIER 3: Between 1/4 - 1/2 mile of the business districts and all schools »TIER 4: All segments falling outside of Tiers 1 - 3 »A Condition Score below 17 is considered an acceptable level of sidewalk condition »A Condition Score of 17 and above is flagged for potential reconstruction and repair »Overlapping segments within some of the Tiers result in a total that is higher than the total number of segments (752) or the total number of miles (83.5) 7 Figure 2.5: A missing (and therefore non-compliant) pedestrian curb ramp on Hinckley Street. Image: Google. Figure 2.6: Pedestrian Ramp Non-Compliance Elements Figure 2.7: Top Four Reasons For Non-Compliance of Curb Ramps Figure 2.8: A compliant pedestrian curb ramp on Prospect Street at N Elm Street. Image: Google. 2.2 Pedestrian Curb Ramps Ramp CompliancePercent of Total RampsNon-compliant Non-compliant (other) Top four reasons for non-compliance: Compliant Missing 8%5% 71%Narrow passing width 9% 14% 16% Cross slope greater than 2% 21%Lack of detectable warning surface 27%Not flush at sidewalk / street interface Pedestrian Ramp Non-Compliant Elements Number of RampsNumber of non-compliant triggers agged on each curb ramp Compliant 1 - 2 3 - 4 5 and above 77 350 268 179 Pedestrian curb ramps are an important part of a complete transportation network. When properly designed and installed, ADA-compliant ramps both warn sight-impaired individuals of the presence of a street crossing via tactile warning strips and provide an accessible landing location for mobility-impaired individuals. Pedestrian curb ramp information was gathered using the Sidewalk Scout Android application by entering manually- collected data into a smartphone. A total of nine unique detail measurements were recorded at each of the City’s 1,042 pedestrian curb ramp locations (see Appendix 1 for measurement types, and Appendix 4 for detailed pedestrian curb ramp condition maps). The four primary factors that trigger curb ramp non-compliance are shown below. Figure 2.7 highlights the number of non-compliant triggers for each curb ramp. The ADA Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG) and Public Rights of Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) were developed to ensure that the built environment would be accessible to people with disabilities. Figure 2.8 shows the top four reasons that are non-compliant for the curb ramps inventoried. When those ramps are reconstructed, the following parameters must be met*: • Flush at Sidewalk / Flush at Street: Transition between sidewalk and ramp or street and ramp with < 1/2” vertical gap • Detectable warning surface: Include a detectable warning surface • Cross Slope: The grade or slope of the ramp perpendicular to the direction of travel is < 2% • Passing Width: The passing width shall be a minimum of 5’-0” The following pages contain maps that visually display curb ramps throughout the City of Northampton. The three maps display: • Citywide Curb Ramps • Downtown Curb Ramps • Florence Curb Ramps *Curb cut compliance information summarized from the United States Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration’s document *Accessible Sidewalks and Street Crossings - an informational guide. <http://www.bikewalk.org/pdfs/sopada_fhwa.pdf>8 n n n n n n n Ryan RdBridge Rd Burts Pit Rd Elm S t N King StFlorence RdKing StSylvester RdS p r i n g S t N M a i n S tKennedy RdMt Tom RdN Elm StSouth StBridge StNook RdRiver RdReservoir RdA u d u b o n R d State StPleasant StRiverside Dr Prospec t S t H o c k a n u m R d Da m o n R d Easthampton RdRocky Hill Rd Locust S t Old Springeld RdFair StMain StPine St Hunts RdWest StW Farms RdHigh St Grove St Co n z S tOak StS M a i n S t Jackson StRi v e r b a n k R d Old Wilson Rd Meadow S t Ly m a n R d Florenc e S t Hateld StC u r t i s N o o k R d Drury LnVernon StCardinal WayBliss StRick D r Overlook D r H aw l e y S tRound Hill RdFor t S t In d u s t r i a l D r Greenleaf DrDunphy D rClark StPrince St Northampton StBirch LnDimock StMontague RdBrookwood D r Main St!! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 21 Miles N0 Figure 2.9: Pedestrian Curb Ramps - Citywide Legend Non-compliant curb ramp Compliant curb ramp Existing sidewalk Missing curb ramp State Highway Schooln # 9 nn n n n n n n n n n n Ryan RdBridge Rd Burts Pit Rd El m S t N King StFlorence RdPark Hill Rd Westhampton Rd King StSylvester RdSpring StChestereld RdN Main StKennedy RdMt Tom RdN Elm StSouth StBridge StNook R dRiver RdReservoir RdAudubon Rd State St21Pleasant StHaydenville RdProspe c t S t Damon RdN Maple StEasthampton RdLocust S t Coles Meadow RdValley Field RdOld Springeld RdFair StMain StPine St Nonotuc k S t Mount Tom RdWebbs Ho l low Rd West St W Farms RdGlendale RdIsland RdNorth StHigh St Ra i n b o w R d Co n z S tOak StS M a i n S tChestnut StLake StOld Wilson RdMeadow St Ly m a n R dWater StChapel StHateld StC u r t i s N o o k R d Drury LnTurkey Hill RdHinck ley St Cooke Ave Warner St Cardinal WayPark StOld Ferry Rd Franklin StBliss StP y n c h o n M e a d ow R d Rick DrMaple StEarle StWillow St Overlook Dr Ventures Field RdHawley S tRound Hill RdWo o d s R dHillcrest DrFern St Green StFort Hill RdFor t S t You n g R a i n b o w R d Cross Path RdStraw AveBeaco n S tLeonard StFr u i t S t Loudville RdWilliams StFront St Clement StCrescent StMarke t S t Acrebro o k Dr P a r s o n s S tLilly St Oxbow Rd Industrial Dr Greenleaf DrLaure l S t Deereld D r Dunphy D rBrookside CirG o t h i c S t Danks RdClark StNew South StMountain St L ib e r t y S t Pine BrkGrove AvePrince St D a y A v e Marian StMiddle St Mu n r o e S t Pomeroy Te rBradford StGleason RdOld Quarry RdFox Farms RdBirch LnUpland Rd Lane Plant Rd Br i e rwood D r Center S tHenshaw AveSummer St Maple Ri d g e R d Or c h a r d S tMontague RdBaker Hill RdOld South StSpruce Hill Av e Brookwood D r Sheeld Ln Woodland Dr Bancroft RdKeyes StMeadowbrook AptsThe Cir Vi l lage H i l l Rd Pi o n e e r K n l s Austin CirAutumn DrR e d f o r d D r L o v e e l d S t Bi r c h H i l l R d Country Way Eli z a b e t h S t Trumbull Rd Atwood Dr Li n c o l n A v e Oliver StMulberry St Co l u m b u s A v e L a d d A v e Leeno Ter I ce Pond D r Bright St Allen RdBurncolt Rd Avis Cir Stoddard StMount a i n L a u r e l P a t h Reed StTiany LnHowes StHampshire Hts Ridge View RdChurch StHayes AveBe a t t i e D r Sovereign WayHateld RdHastings HtsMary Jane LnO d o n n e l l D r Pl a t i n u m C i r Col Lavallee Ln Service CirAlamo Ct Rockland Hts F e r r y A v e S Park T er Kingsley AveCloverdale StArmory StIndian Hl Pine Valley RdMdpw DrHigh St Maple StMain St Hateld StOxbow Rd !!!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! # # # # # ## # ## ## ### # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # ### # # ## # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # ## ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # ## # # # # # # # ## # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## Legend Non-compliant curb ramp Compliant curb ramp Existing sidewalk Missing curb ramp State Highway Schooln # N Figure 2.10: Pedestrian Curb Ramps - Downtown 10 n n n n n n n n n n n n Ryan RdBridge Rd Burts Pit Rd El m S t N King StFlorence RdPark Hill Rd Westhampton Rd King StSylvester RdSpri n g S t Chestereld Rd N M a i n S tKennedy RdMt Tom RdN Elm StSouth StBridge StNook R dRiver RdReservoir RdAudubon Rd State St21Pleasant StHaydenville RdProspe c t S t Dam o n R dN Maple StEasthampton RdLocust S t Coles Meadow RdValley Field RdOld Springeld RdFair StMain StPine St Nonotuc k S t Mount Tom RdWebbs Ho l low Rd West St W Farms RdGlendale RdIsland RdNorth StHigh St Ra i n b o w R d Co n z S tOak StS M a i n S tChestnut StLake StOld Wilson RdMeadow St Ly m a n R dWater StChapel StHateld StC u r t i s N o o k R d Drury LnTurkey Hill Rd Hinck ley St C o o k e A v e Warner St Cardinal WayPark StOld Ferry Rd Franklin StBliss StP y n c h o n M e a d ow R d Rick D r Maple StEarle StWillow St Overloo k Dr Ventures Field RdHawley S tRound Hill RdWo o d s R d Hillcrest DrFern St Green StFort Hill RdFor t S t You n g R a i n b o w R d Cross Path RdStraw AveBeaco n S tLeonard StFr u i t S t Loudville RdWilliams StFront St Clement StCrescent StMarke t S t Acrebro o k Dr P a r s o n s S tLi l ly S t Oxbow Rd In d u s t r i a l D r Greenleaf DrLaure l S t Deereld D r Dunphy D rBrookside CirG o t h i c S t Danks RdClark StNew South StMount a in S t L ib e r t y S t Pine BrkGrove AvePrince St D a y A v e Marian St Middle St Mu n r o e S t Pomeroy Te rBradford StGleas o n R dOld Quarry RdFox Farms RdBirch LnUpland Rd Lan e P l a n t R d Br i e rwood D r Center S tHenshaw AveSummer St Maple Ri d g e R d Or c h a r d S tMontague RdBaker Hill RdOld South StSpruce Hill Av e Brookwood D r Sheeld Ln Woodland Dr Bancroft RdKeyes StMeadowbrook AptsThe Cir Vi l lage H i l l Rd Pi o n e e r K n l s Austin CirAutumn DrR e d f o r d D r L o v e e l d S t Bi r c h H i l l R d Country Way Eli z a b e t h S t Trumbull Rd Atwood Dr Li n c o l n A v e Oliver StMulberry St Co l u m b u s A v e L a d d A v e Leeno Ter I ce Pond D r Bright St Allen Rd Burncolt Rd Avis Cir Stoddard StMount a i n L a u r e l P a t h Reed StTiany Ln Howes StHampshire Hts Ridge View RdChurch StHayes AveBe a t t i e D r Sovereign WayHateld Rd Hastings Hts Mary Jane LnO d o n n e l l D r Pl a t i n u m C i r Col Lavallee Ln Service CirAlamo Ct Rockland Hts F e r r y A v e S Park T er Kingsley AveCloverda le StArmory StIndian Hl Pine Valley RdMdpw Dr High St Maple StMain St Hateld StOxbow Rd !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! # # # # # ## # ## ## ### # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # ### # # ## # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # ## ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # ## # # # # # # # ## # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Legend Non-compliant curb ramp Compliant curb ramp Existing sidewalk Missing curb ramp State Highway Schooln # N Figure 2.11: Pedestrian Curb Ramps - Florence 11 2.3 Motor Vehicle Curb Cuts Motor Vehicle Curb Cuts Ramp CompliancePercent of Total RampsNon-compliant Top two reasons for non-compliance: Compliant 36%14% 64% Cross slope greater than 2% Narrow passing zone* 54% 10% Figure 2.13: An example of a non-compliant (and defunct) curb cut on Finn Street just east of State Street. Image: Google. *Width of sidewalk between top of the curb cut and back of sidewalk is < 3’-0” Motor vehicle curb cut data was collected using the Sidewalk Scout Android application, taking field measurements at each curb cut location. Information was collected for 3,041 motor vehicle curb cuts. Driveways that do not intersect sidewalks were not included in this report. A variety of measurements and other specific details were recorded at each pedestrian curb ramp location (see Appendix 1 for types of measurements). Figure 2.12 highlights the two primary factors that triggered curb cut non-compliance: a narrow passing zone and cross slope > 2%. In order to meet ADA/PROWAG compliance, the following parameters must be met*: • Flush at Sidewalk / Flush at Street: Transition between sidewalk and ramp or street and ramp with < 1/4” differential • Flare Slope: Not to exceed 10% • Cross Slope: The cross slope of the ramp perpendicular to the direction of travel must be < 2% • Passing Width: The passing width shall be a minimum of 4’-0” The following pages contain maps that visually display curb ramps throughout the City of Northampton. The three maps display: • Citywide Curb Cuts • Downtown Curb Cuts • Florence Curb Cuts Figure 2.12: Motor Vehicle Curb Cuts Compliance *Curb cut compliance information summarized from the United States Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration’s document *Accessible Sidewalks and Street Crossings - an informational guide. <http://www.bikewalk.org/pdfs/sopada_fhwa.pdf> 12 n n n n n n n n n n n n n n Ryan RdBridge Rd Burts Pit Rd Elm S t N King StFlorence RdKing StSylvester RdS p r i n g S t N M a i n S tKennedy RdMt Tom RdN Elm StSouth StBridge StNook RdRiver RdReservoir RdA u d u b o n R d State StPleasant StRiverside Dr Prospe c t S t H o c k a n u m R d Da m o n R d Easthampton RdRocky Hill Rd Locust S t Old Springeld RdFair StMain StPine St Hunts RdWest StW Farms RdHigh St Grove St Co n z S tOak StS M a i n S t Jackson StRi v e r b a n k R d Old Wilson Rd Meadow S t Ly m a n R d Florenc e S t Hateld StC u r t i s N o o k R d Drury LnVernon StCardinal WayBliss StRick D r Overlook D r H aw l e y S tRound Hill RdFor t S t In d u s t r i a l D r Greenleaf DrDunphy D rClark StPrince St Northampton StBirch LnDimock StMontague RdBrookwood D r Burts Pit Rd Main St21 Miles N0 Figure 2.14: Curb Cuts - Citywide Legend Non-compliant curb cut Compliant curb cut Existing sidewalk State Highway Schooln 13 nn n n n n n n n n n n Ryan RdBridge Rd Burts Pit Rd El m S t N King StFlorence RdPark Hill Rd Westhampton Rd King StSylvester RdSpring StChestereld Rd 20N Main StKennedy RdMt Tom RdN Elm StSouth StBridge StNook R dRiver RdReservoir RdAudubon Rd State St21Pleasant StHaydenville RdProspe c t S t Damon RdN Maple StEasthampton RdLocust S t Coles Meadow RdValley Field RdOld Springeld RdFair StMain StPine St Nonotuc k S t Mount Tom RdWebbs Ho l low Rd West St W Farms RdGlendale RdIsland RdNorth StHigh St Ra i n b o w R d Co n z S tOak StS M a i n S tChestnut StLake StOld Wilson RdMeadow St Ly m a n R dWater StChapel StHateld StC u r t i s N o o k R d Drury LnTurkey Hill RdHinck ley St Cooke Ave Warner St Cardinal WayPark StOld Ferry Rd Franklin StBliss StP y n c h o n M e a d ow R d Rick Dr Maple StEarle StWillow St Overloo k Dr Ventures Field RdHawley S tRound Hill RdWo o d s R dHillcrest DrFern St Green StFort Hill RdFor t S t You n g R a i n b o w R d Cross Path RdStraw AveBeaco n S tLeonard StFr u i t S t Loudville RdWilliams StFront St Clement StCrescent StMarke t S t Acrebro o k Dr P a r s o n s S tLilly St Oxbow Rd Industrial Dr Greenleaf DrLaure l S t Deereld D r Dunphy D rBrookside CirG o t h i c S t Danks RdClark StNew South StMountain St L ib e r t y S t Pine BrkGrove AvePrince St D a y A v e Marian StMiddle St Mu n r o e S t Pomeroy Te rBradford StGleason RdOld Quarry RdFox Farms RdBirch LnUpland Rd Lane Plant Rd Br i e rwood D r Center S tHenshaw AveSummer St Maple Ri d g e R d Or c h a r d S tMontague RdBaker Hill RdOld South StSpruce Hill Av e Brookwood D r Sheeld Ln Woodland Dr Bancroft RdKeyes StMeadowbrook AptsThe Cir Vi l lage H i l l Rd Pi o n e e r K n l s Austin Cir Autumn DrR e d f o r d D r L o v e e l d S t Bi r c h H i l l R d Country Way Eli z a b e t h S t Trumbull Rd Atwood Dr Li n c o l n A v e Oliver StMulberry St Co l u m b u s A v e L a d d A v e Leeno Ter I ce Pond D r Bright St Allen RdBurncolt Rd Avis Cir Stoddard StMount a i n L a u r e l P a t h Reed StTiany LnHowes StHampshire Hts Ridge View RdChurch StHayes AveBe a t t i e D r Sovereign WayHateld RdHastings HtsMary Jane LnO d o n n e l l D r Pl a t i n u m C i r Col Lavallee Ln Service CirAlamo Ct Rockland Hts F e r r y A v e S Park Ter Kingsley AveCloverdale StArmory StIndian Hl Pine Valley RdMdpw DrHigh St Maple StMain St Hateld StOxbow Rd Legend Non-compliant curb cut Compliant curb cut Existing sidewalk State Highway Schooln N Figure 2.15: Curb Cuts - Downtown 14 n n n n n n n n n n n n Ryan RdBridge Rd Burts Pit Rd El m S t N King StFlorence RdPark Hill Rd Westhampton Rd King StSylvester RdSpri n g S t Chestereld Rd 2 0 N M a i n S tKennedy RdMt Tom RdN Elm StSouth StBridge StNook R dRiver RdReservoir RdAudubon Rd State St21Pleasant StHaydenville RdProspe c t S t Dam o n R dN Maple StEasthampton RdLocust S t Coles Meadow RdValley Field RdOld Springeld RdFair StMain StPine St Nonotuc k S t Mount Tom RdWebbs Ho l low Rd West St W Farms RdGlendale RdIsland RdNorth StHigh St Ra i n b o w R d Co n z S tOak StS M a i n S tChestnut StLake StOld Wilson RdMeadow St Ly m a n R dWater StChapel StHateld StC u r t i s N o o k R d Drury LnTurkey Hill Rd Hinck ley St C o o k e A v e Warner St Cardinal WayPark StOld Ferry Rd Franklin StBliss StP y n c h o n M e a d ow R d Rick D r Maple StEarle StWillow St Overloo k Dr Ventures Field RdHawley S tRound Hill RdWo o d s R d Hillcrest DrFern St Green StFort Hill RdFor t S t You n g R a i n b o w R d Cross Path RdStraw AveBeaco n S tLeonard StFr u i t S t Loudville RdWilliams StFront St Clement StCrescent StMarke t S t Acrebro o k Dr P a r s o n s S tLi l ly S t Oxbow Rd In d u s t r i a l D r Greenleaf DrLaure l S t Deereld D r Dunphy D rBrookside CirG o t h i c S t Danks RdClark StNew South StMount a in S t L ib e r t y S t Pine BrkGrove AvePrince St D a y A v e Marian St Middle St Mu n r o e S t Pomeroy Te rBradford StGleas o n R dOld Quarry RdFox Farms RdBirch LnUpland Rd Lan e P l a n t R d Br i e rwood D r Center S tHenshaw AveSummer St Maple Ri d g e R d Or c h a r d S tMontague RdBaker Hill RdOld South StSpruce Hill Av e Brookwood D r Sheeld Ln Woodland Dr Bancroft RdKeyes StMeadowbrook AptsThe Cir Vi l lage H i l l Rd Pi o n e e r K n l s Austin CirAutumn DrR e d f o r d D r L o v e e l d S t Bi r c h H i l l R d Country Way Eli z a b e t h S t Trumbull Rd Atwood Dr Li n c o l n A v e Oliver StMulberry St Co l u m b u s A v e L a d d A v e Leeno Ter I ce Pond D r Bright St Allen Rd Burncolt Rd Avis Cir Stoddard StMount a i n L a u r e l P a t h Reed StTiany Ln Howes StHampshire Hts Ridge View RdChurch StHayes AveBe a t t i e D r Sovereign WayHateld Rd Hastings Hts Mary Jane LnO d o n n e l l D r Pl a t i n u m C i r Col Lavallee Ln Service CirAlamo Ct Rockland Hts F e r r y A v e S Park T er Kingsley AveCloverda le StArmory StIndian Hl Pine Valley RdMdpw Dr High St Maple StMain St Hateld StOxbow Rd Legend Non-compliant curb cut Compliant curb cut Existing sidewalk State Highway Schooln N Figure 2.16: Curb Cuts - Florence 15 CHAPTER THREE: RECOMMENDED REPAIR & RECONSTRUCTION With sidewalk conditions analyzed and evaluated in the previous chapter, this section articulates a two-step process to reduce the 183 least-compliant sidewalk segments in Tiers 1 through 4 into a more- manageable group of 21 sidewalk segments in greatest need of repair or reconstruction. These 21 segments are within a 1/4 mile of the City’s seven public schools or two central business districts, i.e. within Tier 1 or Tier 2. 3.1 Prioritization Step One Based on the Condition Score analysis method described earlier, dozens of sidewalk segments received a score of 17 or higher. These are considered the “least compliant” segments and are shown in Map Figures 3.1 - 3.4 on the following pages, organized by Tiers. Tier 1 - 22 sidewalk segments shown in Figure 3.1, totaling 4.8 miles within a 1/4 mile of the 7 public schools in Northampton Tier 2 - 31 sidewalk segments shown in Figure 3.2, totalling 4.5 miles within a 1/4 mile of Downtown Northampton and Florence Center Tier 3 - 88 sidewalk segments totalling 15.5 miles between 1/4 and 1/2 mile of the schools and the two central business districts Tier 4 - 42 sidewalk segments totalling 6.4 miles that reside outside of Tiers 1-3 areas 3.2 Prioritization Step Two Whereas Step One articulated the 183 least compliant sidewalk segments within Tiers 1 through 4 based on a quantitative analysis, Step Two used a qualitative method to reduce the number down to those in greatest need of repair or reconstruction. Because of the importance of providing a high quality pedestrian environment close to schools and business districts, only those segments falling within Tiers 1 or 2 were considered. Of the 22 sidewalks segments within Tier 1 and 31 segments within Tier 2, ten and eleven segments, respectively, were considered the most beneficial to repair due to the high Condition Score. These 21 segments were isolated within each Tier and considered the City’s highest priority repair or reconstruction projects. They are shown in Figures 3.5 and 3.6, which includes both maps and corresponding tables. In addition, the 21 segments were narrowed down further to a group of ten projects, which are highlighted in tables 4.1 and 4.2 as well as in Appendix 5. Cost estimates developed for these ten projects are provided in Appendix 1. 16 HADLEY HATFIELD EASTHAMPTON WILLIAMSBURG SOUTH HADLEY HOLYOKE WESTHAMPTON SOUTHAMPTON Ryan RdBridge Rd Burts Pit Rd Elm S t N King StFlorence RdKing StSylvester RdS p r i n g S t N M a i n S tKennedy RdMt Tom RdN Elm StSouth StBridge StNook RdRiver RdReservoir RdA u d u b o n R d State StPleasant StRiverside Dr Prospe c t S t H o c k a n u m R d Da m o n R d Easthampton RdRocky Hill Rd Locust S t Old Springeld RdFair StMain StPine St Hunts RdWest StW Farms RdHigh St Grove St Co n z S tOak StS M a i n S t Jackson StRi v e r b a n k R d Old Wilson Rd Meadow S t Ly m a n R d Florenc e S t Hateld StC u r t i s N o o k R d Drury LnVernon StCardinal WayBliss StRick D r Overlook D r H aw l e y S tRound Hill RdFo r t S t In d u s t r i a l D r Greenleaf DrDunphy D rClark StPrince St Northampton StBirch LnDimock StMontague RdBrookwood D r Burts Pit Rd Main Stn n n n n n n n n n n n n n 21 Miles N0 SIDEWALKS WITH A SCORE >= 17 Tier # of Sidewalks Miles 1 22 4.7 Figure 3.1: Least Compliant Sidewalk Segments - Tier 1 Tier 1 Sidewalk: Within 1/4 mile of all schools Borderline Acceptable Score: Worst Condition Note that sidewalk segments were not ‘clipped’ at the buer boundary line, therefore some segments extend beyond the 0.25 mile radius State Highway Schooln 17 25 17 HADLEY EASTHAMPTON WILLIAMSBURG SOUTH HADLEY HOLYOKE WESTHAMPTON SOUTHAMPTONRyan RdBridge Rd Burts Pit Rd Elm S t N King StFlorence RdKing StSylvester RdS p r i n g S t N M a i n S tKennedy RdMt Tom RdN Elm StSouth StBridge StNook RdRiver RdReservoir RdAudubon Rd State StPleasant StRiverside Dr Prospe c t S t H o c k a n u m R d Da m o n R d Easthampton RdRocky Hill Rd Locust S t Old Springeld RdFair StMain StPine St Hunts RdWest StW Farms RdHigh St Grove St Co n z S tOak StS M a i n S t Jackson StRi v e r b a n k R d Old Wilson Rd Meadow S t Ly m a n R d Florence St Hateld StC u r t i s N o o k R d Drury LnVernon StCardinal WayBliss StRick Dr Overlook D r H aw l e y S tRound Hill RdFo r t S t In d u s t r i a l D r Greenleaf DrDunphy D rClark StPrince St Northampton StBirch LnDimock StMontague RdBrookwood D r Burts Pit Rd Main Stn n n n n n n n n n n n n n 21 Miles N0 Tier 2 area (1/4 mile Florence Center buer) Tier 2 area (1/4 mile Downtown Northampton buer) SIDEWALKS WITH A SCORE >= 17 Tier # of Sidewalks Miles 2 31 4.4 Tier 2 Sidewalk: Within 1/4 mile of Northampton and Florence CBDs Borderline Acceptable Score: Worst Condition Note that sidewalk segments were not ‘clipped’ at the buer boundary line, therefore some segments extend beyond the 0.25 mile radius State Highway Schooln 17 25 Figure 3.2: Least Compliant Sidewalk Segments - Tier 2 18 HADLEY EASTHAMPTON WILLIAMSBURG SOUTH HADLEY HOLYOKE WESTHAMPTON SOUTHAMPTON Ryan RdBridge Rd Burts Pit Rd Elm S t N King StFlorence RdKing StSylvester RdS p r i n g S t N M a i n S tKennedy RdMt Tom RdN Elm StSouth StBridge StNook RdRiver RdReservoir RdA u d u b o n R d State StPleasant StRiverside Dr Prospec t S t H o c k a n u m R d Da m o n R d Easthampton RdRocky Hill Rd Locust S t Old Springeld RdFair StMain StPine St Hunts RdWest StW Farms RdHigh St Grove St Co n z S tOak StS M a i n S t Jackson StRi v e r b a n k R d Old Wilson RdMeadow S t Ly m a n R d Florenc e S t Hateld S t Cur t i s Nook RdDrury LnVernon StCardinal WayBliss StRick D r Overlook D r H aw l e y S tRound Hill RdFo r t S t In d u s t r i a l D r Greenleaf DrDunphy DrClark StPrince St Northampton StBirch LnDimock StMontague RdBrookwood D r Burts Pit Rd Main Stn n n n n n n n n n n n n n Area not included in Tier 3 Tier 3 Area 21 Miles N0 SIDEWALKS WITH A SCORE >= 17 Tier # of Sidewalks Miles 3 88 15.5 Tier 3 Sidewalk: Between 1/4 and 1/2 mile of CDBs and all schools Borderline Acceptable Score: Worst Condition Note that sidewalk segments were not ‘clipped’ at the buer boundary line, therefore some segments extend beyond the 0.5 mile radius Schooln 17 41 State Highway Figure 3.3: Least Compliant Sidewalk Segments - Tier 3 19 HADLEY EASTHAMPTON WILLIAMSBURG SOUTH HADLEY HOLYOKE WESTHAMPTON SOUTHAMPTON Ryan RdBridge Rd Burts Pit Rd Elm S t N King StFlorence RdKing StSylvester RdS p r i n g S t N M a i n S tKennedy RdMt Tom RdN Elm StSouth StBridge StNook RdRiver RdReservoir RdA u d u b o n R d State StPleasant StRiverside Dr Prospec t S t H o c k a n u m R d Da m o n R d Easthampton RdRocky Hill Rd Locust S t Old Springeld RdFair StMain StPine St Hunts RdWest StW Farms RdHigh St Grove St Co n z S tOak StS M a i n S t Jackson StRi v e r b a n k R d Old Wilson Rd Meadow S t Ly m a n R d Florenc e S t Hateld StC u r t i s N o o k R d Drury LnVernon StCardinal WayBliss StRick D r Overlook D r H aw l e y S tRound Hill RdFor t S t In d u s t r i a l D r Greenleaf DrDunphy D rClark StPrince St Northampton StBirch LnDimock StMontague RdBrookwood D r Burts Pit Rd Main Stn n n n n n n n n n n n n n Areas not included in Tier 4 21 Miles N0 SIDEWALKS WITH A SCORE >= 17 Tier # of Sidewalks Miles 4 42 6.4 Tier 4 Sidewalk: All sidewalks not included in Tiers 1 - 3 Borderline Acceptable Score: Worst Condition State Highway Schooln 17 30 Figure 3.4: Least Compliant Sidewalk Segments - Tier 4 20 HADLEY EASTHAMPTON WILLIAMSBURG SOUTH HADLEY HOLYOKE WESTHAMPTON SOUTHAMPTON Ryan RdBrid g e R d Burts Pit Rd Elm St N King StFlorence RdKing StSylvester RdS p r i n g S t N M a i n S tKennedy RdMt Tom RdN Elm StSouth StBridge StNook Rd Front St Reservoir RdA u d u b o n R d State StPleasant StRiverside DrProspect S t Ho c k a n u m R d Damo n R d Easthampton RdRocky Hill RdLocust St Old Springeld RdCherry StMain StPine St Hunts RdWest StW Farms RdHigh St Grove St Con z S tOak St S M a i n S t Prospect AveRi v e r b a n k R d Old Wilson RdMeadow St Lym a n R d Florence St Cur t i s N o o k R d Drury LnMassasoit StCardinal WayBliss StRick D r Overlook Dr Hawl e y S t Arli n g t o n S t Fort S t Ind u s t r i a l D r Greenleaf DrDunphy DrClark StPrince St Northampton StBirch LnDimock StMontague RdBrookwood Dr Main Stn n n n n n n n n n n n n n 357 366 774 981 223 990 92 97 120 427 21 Miles N0 PRIORITIZED SIDEWALKS Number of Sidewalks Miles 10 1.8 Figure 3.5: Prioritized Sidewalk Segments - Tier 1 Rows highlighted in gray were chosen for cost estimates. See Appendix 2. *The Condition Score was used to prioritize the sidewalks for repair (in addition to other factors). The table is sorted by the Condition Score, from borderline acceptable to worst condition. **Pro-Rated score is the Condition Score divided by length and multiplied by 1,000. Table 3.1: Prioritized Sidewalk Segments for Reconstruction / Repair: Tier 1 PRIORITIZED SIDEWALK SEGMENTS FOR RECONSTRUCTION / REPAIR: TIER 1 ObjectID Street Name From To Length Condition Score* Pro- Rated** 223 Prospect Ave Ridgewood Ter Calvin Ter 480.4 17 35 92 Arlington St Franklin St Massasoit St 947.9 20 21 97 Massasoit St Arlington St Elm St 572.8 20 34 774 Ryan Rd Brookside Cir ODonnell Dr 1358.9 20 14 427 Cherry St Parsons St Market St 906.3 21 23 120 Hawley St Phillips St Bridge St 379.1 22 58 357 Front St Chestnut Ave Grove Ave 652.6 22 33 981 Prospect Ave Prospect St Sidewalk End 699.3 24 34 990 N Elm St Deniston Pl Elm St 1364.4 24 18 366 N Main St Bridge Rd Bardwell St 2238.6 25 11 State Highway Schooln 21 HADLEY HATFIELD EASTHAMPTON WILLIAMSBURG SOUTH HADLEY HOLYOKE WESTHAMPTON SOUTHAMPTON Ryan RdBridge Rd Burts Pit Rd Elm S t N King StFlorence RdKing StSylvester RdS p r i n g S t N M a i n S tKennedy RdMt Tom RdN Elm StSouth StBridge StNook RdRiver RdReservoir RdAudubon R d State StPleasant StRiverside Dr Prospe c t S t H o c k a n u m R d Da m o n R d Easthampton RdRocky Hill Rd Locust S t Old Springeld RdFair StMain StPine St Hunts RdWest StW Farms RdHigh St Grove St Co n z S tOak StS M a i n S t Jackson StRi v e r b a n k R d Old Wilson Rd Meadow S t Ly m a n R d Florenc e S t Hateld StC u r t i s N o o k R d Drury LnVernon StCardinal WayBliss StRick D r Overlook D r H aw l e y S tRound Hill RdFo r t S t In d u s t r i a l D r Greenleaf DrDunphy D rClark StPrince St Northampton StBirch LnDimock StMontague RdBrookwood D r Burts Pit Rd Main Stn n n n n n n n n n n n n n 10 681 373 854 846 673 49 278 906 828 732 21 Miles N0 PRIORITIZED SIDEWALKS Number of Sidewalks Miles 11 1.62 Figure 3.6: Prioritized Sidewalk Segments - Tier 2 Rows highlighted in gray were chosen for cost estimates. See Appendix 2. *The Condition Score was used to prioritize the sidewalks for repair (in addition to other factors). The table is sorted by the Condition Score, from borderline acceptable to worst condition. **Pro-Rated score is the Condition Score divided by length and multiplied by 1,000. ***These two segments are parallel sidewalks on the same street. Table 3.2: Prioritized Sidewalk Segments for Reconstruction / Repair: Tier 2 11 PRIORITIZED SIDEWALK SEGMENTS FOR RECONSTRUCTION / REPAIR: TIER 2 ObjectID Street Name From To Length Condition Score* Pro- Rated** 673 Pine St Main St Beacon St 795 20 25 732 Union St Parsons St Market St 1216.8 20 16 828 Trumbull St Gothic St King St 271.2 20 73 906 Maple Ave Entire extents --196.7 20 102 681 Pine St Maple St Corticelli St 1092 22 20 10 Meadow St Lilly St Corticelli St 740.3 24 32 49 N Main St Bardwell St Park St 1350.5 24 18 373*** 854***Middle St Chestnut St Maple St 1075.7 + 1067 = 2142.7 24, 24 22, 22 846 Meadow St Maple St Park St 204.1 24 117 278 Bedford Ter Elm St State St 556.5 26 47 State Highway Schooln 22 [ THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK ] 23 Gaps in the sidewalk network can cause uncomfortable and frustrating conditions for pedestrians, especially for mobility-impaired individuals. Sidewalks gaps often require pedestrians to cross a street twice to reach a destination, frequently without the aid of a crosswalk. Figure 4.1 on the following page displays the existing sidewalk gaps throughout Northampton. The gap analysis in this report is intended to help the City determine the highest priority areas for new sidewalk construction. An important priority for closing gaps in Northampton’s sidewalk network is establishing consistent sidewalks between residential neighborhoods and local schools. Many Northampton students walk to school. Yet, there are many more who would like to walk but rely on the bus, a ride from a parent /guardian, or--for high school students--drive to school, in part because of the incomplete sidewalk network. Providing a more complete sidewalk (and bicycle) network will likely result in more students choosing to walk and has the additional benefit of allowing students more freedom and flexibility in how they choose to commute to school. The sidewalk gap analysis was prepared using the following process: • Mapping the existing sidewalk gaps via GIS mapping, using site visits by Alta and Georgia Tech staff and analyzing Google street view, and other online sources CHAPTER FOUR: SIDEWALK GAPS • Coding the above information to reflect the presence or absence of another sidewalk on the opposite side of the street Each gap/missing sidewalk was coded in order to display: • Which side of the street the gap is located on (north, south, east, or west) • Whether or not the sidewalk gap exists on one or both sides of the street 24 n n n n n n n n n n n n HADLEY EASTHAMPTON WILLIAMSBURG SOUTH HADLEY HOLYOKEWESTHAMPTONRyan RdBridge Rd Burts Pit Rd Elm S t N King StFlorence RdKing StSylvester RdS p r i n g S t N M a i n S tKennedy RdMt Tom RdN Elm StSouth StBridge StNook RdRiver RdReservoir RdA u d u b o n R d State StPleasant StRiverside Dr Prospe c t S t H o c k a n u m R d Da m o n R d Easthampton RdRocky Hill Rd Locust S t Old Springeld RdFair StMain StPine St Hunts RdWest StW Farms RdHigh St Grove St Co n z S tOak StS M a i n S t Jackson StRi v e r b a n k R d Old Wilson Rd Meadow S t Ly m a n R d Florenc e S t Hateld StC u r t i s N o o k R d Drury LnVernon StCardinal WayBliss StRick D r Overlook D r H aw l e y S tRound Hill RdFor t S t In d u s t r i a l D r Greenleaf DrDunphy DrClark StPrince St Northampton StBirch LnDimock StMontague RdBrookwood D r Burts Pit Rd Main St21 Miles N0 Figure 4.1: Existing Sidewalk Gaps - Citywide Legend Sidewalk Gaps Sidewalk Missing on One Side Sidewalk Missing on Two Sides 1 Mile Commercial Center Buer Schooln 25 4.1 Prioritization Of New Sidewalks Both Sheffield Lane and Hillcrest Drive (intersecting from the left) are missing sidewalks on both sides of the street, and are within 1/2 mile of Florence Center, therefore both of these streets fall under the Tier A category. Image: Google. Vernon Street is missing a sidewalk along one side of the street, and falls within 1/2 mile of Northampton High School, therefore this street falls under the Tier C category. Image: Google. Both Rick Drive and Maryjane Lane (intersecting from the right) are missing sidewalks on both sides of the street, and fall within 1/2 and 1 mile of Florence center, therefore both of these streets fall under the Tier B category. Image: Google. Ryan Road near Burts Pit Road is missing a sidewalk on one side of the street, and falls between 1/2 and 1 mile of Ryan Road Elementary School, therefore this street falls under the Tier D category. Image: Google. *Sidewalk segments were not ‘clipped’ at the buffer boundary line, therefore a handful of segments may be repeated within this column. Sidewalk gaps have been prioritized based on four Tiers, and are shown in Map Figures 4.3 - 4.6 on the following pages: »TIER A: No sidewalk on either side of the street, within 1/2 mile of Downtown Northampton, Florence Center, and all 7 public schools »TIER B: No sidewalk on either side of the street, between 1/2 mile and 1 mile of Downtown Northampton, Florence Center, and schools »TIER C: Sidewalk on one side of the street, within 1/2 mile of Downtown Northampton, Florence Center, and schools »TIER D: Sidewalk on one side of the street, between 1/2 mile and 1 mile of Downtown Northampton, Florence Center, and schools NUMBER AND LENGTH OF GAP BY TIER Tier Number of Sidewalk Gaps Within Tier Miles Within Tier* A 383 52.2 B 231 54.5 C 216 26.7 D 73 11.5 TIER BTIER A Figure 4.2: Tier A - D Sidewalk Gap Examples TIER DTIER C *The data displayed in this bar chart is cumulative, representing total miles of linear length of individual sidewalk segments.MilesBoth Sides Cumulative Miles of Sidewalks* Existence of Sidewalk 83.5 One Side Neither Side 127 36.547Figure 4.3: Total number of miles in Northampton’s sidewalk network Table 4.1: Number and length of gap by Tier 26 HADLEY EASTHAMPTON WILLIAMSBURG SOUTH HADLEY HOLYOKESOUTHAMPTON n n n n n n n Ryan RdBridge Rd Burts Pit Rd Elm S t N King StFlorence RdKing StSylvester RdS p r i n g S t N M a i n S tKennedy RdMt Tom RdN Elm StSouth StBridge StNook RdRiver RdReservoir RdA u d u b o n R d State StPleasant StRiverside Dr Prospec t S t H o c k a n u m R d Da m o n R d Easthampton RdRocky Hill Rd Locust S t Old Springeld RdFair StMain StPine St Hunts RdWest StW Farms RdHigh St Grove St Co n z S tOak StS M a i n S t Jackson StRi v e r b a n k R d Old Wilson Rd Meadow S t Ly m a n R d Florenc e S t Hateld StC u r t i s N o o k R d Drury LnVernon StCardinal WayBliss StRick D r Overlook D r H aw l e y S tRound Hill RdFor t S t In d u s t r i a l D r Greenleaf DrDunphy D rClark StPrince St Northampton StBirch LnDimock StMontague RdBrookwood D r Burts Pit Rd Main St21 Miles N0 Legend Tier A Sidewalk Gap: No sidewalk on either side of the street Note that sidewalk segments were not ‘clipped’ at the buer boundary line, therefore some segments extend beyond the half mile radius Schooln Tier A Buer: Within 1/2 mile of Northampton CBD, Florence Center, and schools State Highway Figure 4.4: Sidewalk Gaps - Tier A 27 HADLEY EASTHAMPTON WILLIAMSBURG SOUTH HADLEY HOLYOKE WESTHAMPTON SOUTHAMPTON Ryan RdBridge Rd Burts Pit Rd Elm S t N King StFlorence RdKing StSylvester RdS p r i n g S t N M a i n S tKennedy RdMt Tom RdN Elm StSouth StBridge StNook RdRiver RdReservoir RdA u d u b o n R d State StPleasant StRiverside Dr Prospec t S t H o c k a n u m R d Da m o n R d Easthampton RdRocky Hill Rd Locust S t Old Springeld RdFair StMain StPine St Hunts RdWest StW Farms RdHigh St Grove St Co n z S tOak StS M a i n S t Jackson StRi v e r b a n k R d Old Wilson Rd Meadow S t Ly m a n R d Florenc e S t Hateld StC u r t i s N o o k R d Drury LnVernon StCardinal WayBliss StRick D r Overlook D r H aw l e y S tRound Hill RdFor t S t In d u s t r i a l D r Greenleaf DrDunphy D rClark StPrince St Northampton StBirch LnDimock StMontague RdBrookwood D r Burts Pit Rd Main Stn n n n n n n 21 Miles N0 Legend Tier B Sidewalk Gap: No sidewalk on either side of the street Note that sidewalk segments were not ‘clipped’ at the buer boundary line, therefore some segments extend beyond the half mile radius State Highway Schooln Tier B Buer: Between 1/2 mile and 1 mile of Northampton CBD, Florence Center, and schools Figure 4.5: Sidewalk Gaps - Tier B 28 HADLEY EASTHAMPTON WILLIAMSBURG SOUTH HADLEY HOLYOKE WESTHAMPTON SOUTHAMPTON Ryan RdBridge Rd Burts Pit Rd Elm S t N King StFlorence RdKing StSylvester RdS p r i n g S t N M a i n S tKennedy RdMt Tom RdN Elm StSouth StBridge StNook RdRiver RdReservoir RdA u d u b o n R d State StPleasant StRiverside Dr Prospec t S t H o c k a n u m R d Da m o n R d Easthampton RdRocky Hill Rd Locust S t Old Springeld RdFair StMain StPine St Hunts RdWest StW Farms RdHigh St Grove St Co n z S tOak StS M a i n S t Jackson StRi v e r b a n k R d Old Wilson Rd Meadow S t Ly m a n R d Florenc e S t Hateld StC u r t i s N o o k R d Drury LnVernon StCardinal WayBliss StRick D r Overlook D r H aw l e y S tRound Hill RdFor t S t In d u s t r i a l D r Greenleaf DrDunphy D rClark StPrince St Northampton StBirch LnDimock StMontague RdBrookwood D r Burts Pit Rd Main Stn n n n n n n 21 Miles N0 Legend Tier C Sidewalk Gap: Sidewalk on one side of the street Note that sidewalk segments were not ‘clipped’ at the buer boundary line, therefore some segments extend beyond the half mile radius Schooln Tier C Buer: Within 1/2 mile of Northampton CBD, Florence Center, and Schools State Highway Figure 4.6: Sidewalk Gaps - Tier C 29 HADLEY HATFIELD EASTHAMPTON WILLIAMSBURG SOUTH HADLEY HOLYOKESOUTHAMPTONRyan RdBridge Rd Burts Pit Rd Elm S t N King StFlorence RdKing StSylvester RdS p r i n g S t N M a i n S tKennedy RdMt Tom RdN Elm StSouth StBridge StNook RdRiver RdReservoir RdA u d u b o n R d State StPleasant StRiverside Dr Prospec t S t H o c k a n u m R d Da m o n R d Easthampton RdRocky Hill Rd Locust S t Old Springeld RdFair StMain StPine St Hunts RdWest StW Farms RdHigh St Grove St Co n z S tOak StS M a i n S t Jackson StRi v e r b a n k R d Old Wilson Rd Meadow S t Ly m a n R d Florenc e S t Hateld StC u r t i s N o o k R d Drury LnVernon StCardinal WayBliss StRick D r Overlook D r H aw l e y S tRound Hill RdFor t S t In d u s t r i a l D r Greenleaf DrDunphy D rClark StPrince St Northampton StBirch LnDimock StMontague RdBrookwood D r Burts Pit Rd Main Stn n n n n n n 21 Miles N0 Legend Tier D Sidewalk Gap: No sidewalk on one side of the street Note that sidewalk segments were not ‘clipped’ at the buer boundary line, therefore some segments extend beyond the half mile radius State Highway Schooln Tier D Buer: Between 1/2 mile and 1 mile of Northampton CBD, Florence Center, and schools Figure 4.7: Sidewalk Gaps - Tier D 30 PUBLIC SIDEWALK INVENTORY ANALYSIS REPORT APPENDIX Appendix 1 • Sidewalk, Pedestrian Curb Ramp and Motor Vehicle Curb Cut Measurements | 1 Page Appendix 2 • Priority Project Cost Estimate and Unit Cost Table | 5 Pages Appendix 3 • Georgia Tech Sidewalk and Ramp Condition Data Collection and Analysis Report | 31 Pages Appendix 4 • Detailed Condition Maps | 8 Pages Appendix 5 • Existing Sidewalk Condition Score Tables and Sidewalk Gaps Tables | 43 Pages »Existing Sidewalk Data Tables Organized Alphabetically By Street Name »Existing Sidewalk Data Tables Organized By Condition Score (Best to Worst) »Sidewalk Gaps Data Tables Organized Alphabetically by Street Name