NY 2 (Congress and Ferry Streets)
Corridor Improvements PROJECT

• 1A Comments:
o This option makes the most sense if the city is willing to provide meaning physical protection. That is, either removable protections like the armadillo-shaped delineators, flexible delineators, etc. or more permanent protections like jersey barriers or so-called “tall-curbs”( https://nacto.org/publication/transit-street-design-guide/transit-lanes-transitways/lane-elements/separation-elements/; https://bouldercolorado.gov/news/boulder-installs-protected-bike-lane-infrastructure-new-us). Parking protected lanes could also work, if also paired with some delineators to encourage proper usage of the space and protect vulnerable users. The maintenance concerns around snow removal are easily surmountable if the city is willing to entertain new approaches. This option has the least number of potential conflicts, particularly in turning movements, throughout the corridor. However, if the city is unwilling to install any protections, then there will be no practical means to keep the bike lanes free of obstruction and could actually make biking in the corridor less safe than current conditions, as well as rendering all of the time and money spent on the corridor a waste.
o I think a bike box would be in order for the intersection of Ferry & 5th for bike traffic travelling north. I think there is also opportunity for a different treatment at Ferry & 6th, as the current treatment doesn’t really provide a safe means for bike traffic to turn N onto 6th.
• 1B Comments:
o If the city commits to providing protection for the two-way bike path, then this is the preferrable option despite the additional possible turning conflicts along Congress St. and likely additional travel times for all street users due to more complex turning movements. The protection is really the central feature being offered in this option, as well as the simplicity in navigating the corridor knowing the bike facility is on only one of the streets. I will emphasize that without vertical separation, that there is little advantage to this option and would instead prefer option 1A (which at least could be retrofitted and would have simpler operations).
• Common elements:
o More robust treatment of the intersection with 8th Street is on order to handle somewhat complicated movements with bikes on an incline and a large amount of open asphalt.
o Adding the climbing lane east of 8th is great, but I think perhaps transitioning to a side path on the south side might be safer and simply operations. The current sidewalk is lightly used, is mostly on public land, and would need minimal expansion for a shared path.
o Would love to see more effort in pedestrian crossings being more perpendicular to the street (parking lot entrance b’twn 7th & 8th, at 7th, at 6th northside, etc).
o Relatedly, avoiding apex curb ramps wherever possible, as these are not preferred in PROWAG/ADA for the dangers that they pose to vulnerable users (https://www.access-board.gov/ada/guides/chapter-4-ramps-and-curb-ramps/#diagonal-curb-ramps). This design should definitely be avoided for all proposed reconstructions of ramps.
o Also relatedly, more curb extensions are warranted throughout the corridor (even if phased installation with quick build materials https://crcog.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/CRCOG_TUGuide-FINAL.pdf)
o Investigating the possibility of moving the CDTA station to the NE corner of Congress St. (perhaps using a floating bus island for option 1A) could simplify operations on River Street and allow for protected bike lanes up to the bridge.
• Rt 2 Consolidation - As others have mentioned, looking at consolidating Rt 2 onto Ferry (two-way traffic) to reduce vehicle volumes using Congress St could make for much safer conditions for bike and pedestrian circulation. Markings and gateway treatments at 8th Street could encourage most vehicular traffic onto Ferry.

My recommendations for the Route 2 Corridor Improvement Project are as follows:

1. Consolidate Route 2 onto Ferry street as a bi-directional route.
2. Consolidate the bike path onto Congress street as a bi-directional bike route, with one-way car traffic;
3. Protect the bike path with a concrete barrier, and convert a few parking spots on the opposite side to serve as loading zones.
4. Designate one parking spot per block for bike-only parking.
This aligns most closely with the new Proposal 1B.
Historically, nearby communities used this route, but not in the way we see today.
Before the current bridge, a trolley ran along Congress Street, connecting the area to neighboring towns. This was local transit, not an expressway like today’s Route 2. Reallocating Route 2 to Ferry Street would restore Congress Street to its original function as a local route.

As someone who has run on several streets in and out of Troy—from Eagle Mills to Emma Willard, from Monument Square up the Approach, past the RPI President's mansion on Tibbits, and onto Route 2 and back down—I know firsthand that certain roads here aren’t suited for bikes. I won’t ride my bike on Route 2 because it feels like a death sentence, particularly with the speeding out-of-state drivers who show little regard for local traffic. We can’t change the behavior of drivers from across state lines, which is precisely why this project needs #2: our bicycle traffic consists of locals and families who commute daily.

At the meeting, several residents voiced similar hopes, including a family excited to bike safely across the river to Price Chopper and other long-time residents who depend on Congress Street for their daily commutes.

Before the current bridge, a trolley ran along Congress Street, connecting the area to neighboring towns. This was local transit, not an expressway like today’s Route 2. Reallocating Route 2 to Ferry Street would restore Congress Street to its original function as a local route.

As someone who has run on several streets in and out of Troy—from Eagle Mills to Emma Willard, from Monument Square up the Approach, past the RPI President's mansion on Tibbits, and onto Route 2 and back down—I know firsthand that certain roads here aren’t suited for bikes. I won’t ride my bike on Route 2 because it feels like a death sentence, particularly with the speeding out-of-state drivers who show little regard for local traffic. We can’t change the behavior of drivers from across state lines, which is precisely why this project needs #2: our bicycle traffic consists of locals and families who commute daily.

At the meeting, several residents voiced similar hopes, including a family excited to bike safely across the river to Price Chopper and other long-time residents who depend on Congress Street for their daily commutes.

"The reason why bike lanes suck in this town, compared to Montreal, is we lack commitment to a quality, permanent solution-- not these painted on divisions that can be scraped away in a week. This is a solved problem in other NE cities; the problem isn't a lack of solution, it's a lack of commitment."

Finally, to serve the biking community better, we should provide free parking for bicycles. Dedicating one parking spot per block to bikes would enhance Congress Street’s capacity to welcome visitors and improve accessibility. We could even look at installing charging stations for electric bikes in the future.

I am pleased with the transparency shown at the recent public information hearing for the Corridor. A scenario discussed at the meeting, but not currently pictured on the site, were bike lanes protected by parked cars and a buffer zone. Absent a barrier like flexible vertical posts or low concrete curbs, I believe a parking protected bike lane is the best option.
I will reiterate my comments that protecting the existing trees along the routes should be a priority. The character and beauty of Troy is trifold - the architecture, the urban forest (comprised of street trees, residential trees, plants and vegetation) , and the people. Please balance these three aspects when designing this project.

As a homeowner in downtown off of Congress Street and a bicyclist who uses the roadways, I want to advocate for separated and protected bike lanes. The best plan the City could initiate is a concrete separation of bike lane and autos. After attending the most recent meeting, it became apparent that the city does not have the will nor the finances to make this a reality. So there is really only one plan that comes close to insuring the safety of bicyclists and calms the speed of traffic. That is the alternative that had one lane for traffic, a "parking" protected bike lane with a 3' painted buffer between the parking spots and the bike lane.This should also have some sort of raised piece alerting the drivers parking their cars that they should be within their designated area. When you build a "truly" protected bike lane the people will come to use it. I would also encourage the plans for the bike lanes to have protected connectivity from the Congress street lanes to accessing the Congress St. bridge and the bike path south. Another point I would like to make is the importance of our trees along lower Congress. It is visually one of the most beautiful streets in Troy, an asset to introducing people to our larger community. We have to make a EVERY effort to preserve them. There are many examples of what the cutting of mature trees and the subsequent replacement with much smaller trees does to the character and feel of the neighborhood and its not good.

This area needs extreme traffic calming with protected bike lanes. I ride through here often in a car but mostly on a bicycle. I also walk this are. It is dangerous for people on foot and on bicycles. The drivers of automobiles are too fast. Let’s build a future for all in Troy. Let’s create a walkable, livable community.

I believe that out of all of the options presented for this streets improvement, 1A is the closest to what the residents and visitors of the city needs in order to promote a safe and livable environment. I would suggest some improvements to 1A's design such as parking-protected bike lanes which will make bicyclists safer, encouraging additional bike trips, and making it harder to park in the bike lanes.

The city would also stand to benefit from an extension of infrastructure improvements to at least 8th street to allow direct access to RPI on protected bike lanes. Remember that bicycle infrastructure works best when it's part of a network that connects multiple areas. With a connection to RPI, it would make it easier for students and faculty to access Downtown Troy which can be beneficial to local businesses. Overall i'm all for improving connectivity in the local area while promoting safe and sustainable practices. The proposals made by Capital Streets also should be deeply considered.

I have lived and recreated in the area of concern for 12 years. Please please please do everything you can to slow down cars and make walking/cycling safer, especially for families. Please. We would love to put down roots in Troy, own a home, start a family, and continue to contribute to the community, but if I feel like my child is going to get killed by a car, I won't do it. Instead, we will have to take our tax dollars elsewhere. CITY OF TROY, please keep this in mind when making a final decision. Every decision counts and the city needs to prioritize making people with young families feel safe, so that they will choose to live in Troy instead of moving out to the suburbs.

A two lane protected bike lane would be what the city needs to ensure safety of cyclists and better traffic flow in downtown. Any street in Troy without bike infrastructure is incomplete. I'm in support of the capital streets proposal

I am in support of Capital Streets organizations proposed feedback, which is:

A maximum lane width of 11' and a concept with parking-protected bike lanes on Congress and Ferry. This will create a safer corridor for all while also increasing parking in Downtown Troy.

Capital Streets suggests the following layouts for both Congress and Ferry Streets (33' curb-to-curb width)*:

11' Travel Lane

7.5' Parking Lanes (on each side)

Parking-Protected Bike Lane with a

5' Bike Lane

2' Buffer

It's imperative to make sure cycling is always considered in all plans moving forward, including places to lock bikes and ideally parking-protected bike lanes that allow cyclists to ride on the right side of parked cars, thus limiting the risk of being struck by opening doors and cars pulling away from the curb.

The Route 2 traffic that travels through Troy, New York is detrimental to the community of downtown Troy.
The city's traffic system is pretty simple: a grid of one-ways, alternating direction that has been established since 1787.
It wasn't until 1970 that the Congress Street bridge was completed which has since changed the purpose of Congress and Ferry Street.
The issue with Congress and Ferry Street is that it's distributing the load of traffic incorrectly, and for the wrong audience.

By "wrong audience", I'm meaning wrong consumer audience like how a product is designed for a market.
We must de-prioritize cars as our market segment-- this is what I mean by the "wrong audience."
The traffic of Route 2 brings noise, violence, and bad attitudes from people who don't plan to contribute here.
Every summer night, motorcycles with modified exhausts rev and peel out through Congress street.
Accidents are all too frequent with Congress and 4th street having seen multiple vehicle-to-person collisions and fatalities.
The current placement of the route makes it too easy for brash drivers to enter the downtown at speeds exceeding the limits set by the city.

Every week, I can count well into the teens the number of times speeding cars (rolling off of Route 2 onto 2nd street to cut north) run stop signs where families and children exist.
And by run, I'm not saying rolling stop.

All of the proposed solutions do not solve this problem at the root cause, because the problem cannot be solved effectively without de-prioritizing cars.
All solutions presented align on a road diet that reduces the lanes to one lane per direction.
Additionally, one solution (C) suggests moving the bicycle lanes away from the traffic, which doesn't make sense with the goals of the project.

My proposal is:

1. Make Ferry Street bidirectional for all of Route 2 traffic
2. Add a two lane bicycle path to Congress

This aligns with proposal 1B, except the Ferry Street component.

Implementing a bidirectional Ferry Street for all Route 2 traffic would significantly contribute to the redistribution of traffic and alleviate aggressive traffic from downtown Troy.
While this proposal will worsen the experience for cars, it aligns with the goal of de-prioritizing cars and prioritizing alternative modes of transportation.
Although it may result in increased traffic through a tunnel, this is precisely what the tunnel is designed for: cars!
Additionally, this will allow for Congress Street to return to being a more local street instead of a route.

Local-izing Congress Street would benefit from adding a two-lane bicycle path to prioritize bicycle transportation for not only locals but Russel Sage and RPI students.
Separating the bicycle lanes from the *Route 2* traffic will enhance the safety and comfort of cyclists, encouraging more people to choose biking as a viable transportation option.
Not just residents, college students too; creating a bicycle route on Congress creates an inviting route for Russel Sage and RPI students to easily cross the river and explore the rest of the capital region.

So, the NY Route 2 Corridor Improvements Project should prioritize the needs of the community over the convenience of passing traffic.
By implementing a bidirectional Ferry Street for all Route 2 traffic and adding a two-lane bicycle path to Congress Street, we can effectively redistribute traffic, enhance safety for cyclists, and create a more balanced transportation system.

It is important to remember that while traffic may spend only a few minutes passing through downtown Troy, the residents and businesses spend their lives here.
The Congress Street bridge has only existed since the year 1970 (which allows for this passage) while the Troy grid's design has existed since 1787 (here's a [cool map](https://bostonraremaps.com/inventory/john-klein-troy-new-york-1818/) I found), which is one hundred twenty-one years before the Model T was produced for the public.
Two blocks of streets should not be dedicated to the purpose of Route 2's modern existence. We must isolate this to one street and use the tunnel to dampen the noise for everyone.
By de-prioritizing cars in the evaluation of Route 2, we can create a more livable and vibrant community.

RE: Congress & Ferry Street Improvements

My relationship to the project:
Resident in the middle of the improvement area
Automobile driver & parker in the improvement area
Daily road & gravel bicycle rider in the improvement area
Daily pedestrian & dog walker in the improvement area
Owner & operator of an marketing firm for 35 years, based in Troy

I attended the informational meeting at Bush Memorial on the Russell Sage campus on Tuesday July, 30, 2024.

It is my understanding that this project, in addition to repairing the roadways and sidewalks, it is intended to improve the biking experience in downtown Troy and provide biking pathways that will eventually connect Troy to the Empire State Trail network.

It has been my experience as a bike rider and a marketing agency owner that people will only change their behavior if they perceive that the change is in their best interest or improves their personal experience, regardless of the reality.

Perception = reality

Hence, if a presented option does not provide a perceived benefit to a bicycle rider, they will not change their behavior and will either continue riding their bicycles through Troy as they do presently, or avoid downtown Troy altogether.

Here are my impressions of the three options presented:

1A & 1B:
Either of these solutions work for automobile traffic & Parker’s, bicycle riders and pedestrians, with the following changes:

1A - The painted protective barrier between bicycles and automobile traffic is inadequate to change behavior. Bicyclists all know that automobiles often cross painted barriers into bike lanes and in places where there is high traffic, bicyclists are hit by automobiles. In order for this option to change behavior, the protective barrier would need to be physical, as in option 1B.

1B - With River Street being two lane between Congress and Ferry Street, there is no provision for bicycles to access the Congress Street Bridge.

The implication in presentation is that bikers would continue down Congress to Front Street and loop around to Division to meet River Street and head North to the proposed bike path for the Congress Street Bridge.

While I am a strong enough rider to make climb up River Street to the bridge and from Front Street heading East on Congress, I wouldn’t do it. I, and many other road bikers like me, would simply use the sidewalk or road, as we do now, as this option would be far less convenient, direct and desirable than the existing conditions.

The average casual biker and/or children wouldn’t use it either as they do not have the strength to make the River Street and Congress Street climbs.

Hence, without a provision for bicycles to access the Congress Street Bridge heading South on River, this option would not change behavior.

1C - The Liberty Street option would be virtually ignored by all road bicyclist for two reasons:

Firstly, the lane shared between automobiles and bikers offers no improvement in safety from the current conditions, and includes a significant detour from their current path, hence regular bicycle riders would continue to use their existing paths on the road and sidewalks - making this option a folly as it would fail to change behavior. There is no adequate solution to this option that eliminates the detour.

Secondly, the bicycle rider most likely to use this option would be casual riders, children and families. The first one of these people who are hit by an automobile in the shared lane would cause body injury and potentially death, trigger lawsuits implicating the city and a public outcry and blame game pointing at the designers and decision makers behind this project.

Hence, while this option save money in the short run, it is the most costly option in the long run and should be avoided at all costs.

The Troy Public Library, at the corner of 2nd and Ferry Streets, already has signs of sagging toward the underpass with cracks and marble pieces being pushed outward due to pressure - visible within the interior. How do the engineers/planners envision supporting the structure so that it doesn't land on Ferry Street in the future with the design work taking place? And, has anyone reached out to the Library Board of Trustees regarding these plans?

I submit these comments as a near-daily traveller in the project area: as a bicyclist, a CDTA bus rider and a motorist. I have experience with navigating around downtown Troy for over sixty years and have seen many changes both good and for ill. First, I will state some general principles and make statements that apply to all alternatives:
- At age 71, I am perfectly comfortable cycling with motor vehicle traffic in the travel lanes. I don’t think that makes me a dinosaur, because I see plenty of young adults doing it too and they appear to be biking for transportation, not recreation. The alternative, installing separate bike lanes is not so good a solution as is currently popular, especially when maintenance falls behind. This alone makes me lean toward Alternative 1C.
- In my experience, two-way bike lanes are not very practical (which renders alternative 1B a non-starter as far as I’m concerned. Besides the awkwardness of putting opposing bike movements artificially close to each other when there’s plenty more real estate to separate them (as in Alternative 1A), there’s also the long-term maintenance issue (the two-way lane on River Street between Division and Adams is pretty much obliterated after about five years).
- If separate bike lanes are to be the preference, why is it that NONE of the three alternatives make any attempt to provide such lanes east of Sixth Avenue? This area happens to be where I, and other cyclists, ride every day. It certainly has nothing to do with inability to acquire the needed right-of-way.
- There is no justification for having two parallel travel lanes in the same direction anywhere within a dense urban fabric. The worst consequence is that motor vehicle speeds instantly increase in those areas, rendering the adjacent land undesirable for the type of “new urbanist” development that is desired in the currently undeveloped area east of Sixth (created in the 1950s by another ill-advised highway project that ended up never being built, thank goodness). The fact that this area is on a significant grade means the higher speeds make collisions more likely in winter conditions. All three of the proffered alternatives mostly maintain the existing two-parallel-travel-lane status quo east of Fifth Ave, which would appear to be a very bad thing.
- The same argument is just as valid against keeping two travel lanes within the Ferry Street Tunnel, particularly with respect to vehicle speed approaching the intersection with Third Street. Necking down the last couple of hundred feet is not sufficient to keep speeds down in the first place. Here’s a bold idea: while getting rid of parallel travel lanes in the tunnel why not make the whole tunnel route a two-way street for motor vehicles all the way between Third Street and the new intersection with River Street? There would probably be room for separate bike lanes on both sides, too. There could be a lot of benefits to this, including northbound-to-bridge vehicles not having to go to ped-heavy Congress; I can see some downsides as well.
- For eastbound vehicular traffic on Ferry Street approaching the intersection with Eighth Street, there should be a slip lane for traffic (vehicular, transit and bicycle) continuing east on Ferry. The current configuration (which all three Alternatives replicate functionally) causes a colossal waste of energy when east bound traffic is brought to a halt on a considerable climbing grade for no practical reason. With a slip lane, the only conflict (traffic entering from Eighth) can be handled with a merge east of the intersection beyond the end of the slip lane. Also, this intersection’s signals seem currently to lack any occupancy detection, which, if installed, would also help immensely with saving fuel and reducing delay.
- One of the most significant problems with the current conditions is that, in areas where there is no on-street parking, existing building fronts are not buffered from the noise and safety risk of the vehicular traffic that is too close and too fast. The heavy aggregate trucks aggravate this, but perhaps there is nothing to be done about that. The lack of commercial or residential activity at those locations is palpable, with few exceptions. The solution is to restore the former on-street parking (eliminated inadvisably decades ago) wherever feasible and the space is not needed for a more desirable purpose (such as CDTA bus stops). This is another argument in favor of Alternative 1C.
- I understand that the problem of delivery trucks occupying a travel lane has been pointed out. I agree that it is a problem and that increasing on-street parking could make it worse. The solution is for there to be designated areas for delivery trucks (possibly taking away some of the new on-street parking), that may or may not be immediately in front of the receiving business. If the delivery drivers don’t like having to go a few extra steps, well too bad – their behavior has also been a big part of the problem. The solution is enforcement (a far higher priority for the City than enforcing other parking regulations). Another party that needs to be more active in managing this problem is the Downtown Troy BID.
- I see that all Alternatives provide for a CDTA stop at Ferry and River just off the bridge; this is an excellent development! Correspondingly, there should be a stop on River Street for busses just about to turn onto the bridge, whether or not there’s room for it to be separated from the travel lane.
- The utility of the provision for northbound traffic on River from Ferry to Congress would be greatly increased if River Street were reversed from one-way south to one-way north between Congress and State Street. If the objective is to make it easier for vehicles coming off the bridge to go north sooner than getting to Fourth Street, the new arrangement still requires them to go around to Front Street and back up at State Street, so not much difference except now they will also have to wait for a left-turn arrow at the new intersection. The downside of my suggestion is that southbound vehicles on River Street would have to take a similar detour down to Front Street instead of the direct route they enjoy now, but the upside is perhaps it’s more desirable to keep these vehicles off of River Street in the first place (for the sake of quietude on River between First and Congress) and have them use First Street to get to Congress. In any case, the eastbound movement of vehicles from Front Street can be somewhat unsafe at the intersection with River Street due to limited sight distance and the severe grade and vertical curvature.
- The idea to make Fifth Avenue two-way between Congress and Ferry is interesting but I’m not sure what the intended benefit might be; all the traffic that might want to use that route to get to Congress Street to proceed west (i.e., coming from the Hill Street/Little Italy area) can already achieve this outcome by using Fourth Street to get to Congress. There are two downsides of the proposal. One is that it is facilitated by perpetuating the lack of on-street parking on that very block, mostly on the east side of Fifth. The other downside is that it would be a break in the long-established pattern of alternating one-way streets in the downtown core.
- Another street with artificially limited on-street parking is Third Street between Congress and Ferry. This is within the project perimeter but not planned for any changes; it should be included in the project scope for providing on-street parking on the west side. There is absolutely no logical reason to keep this obsolete restriction.
- The plans show some geometric difference in the treatment of the crosswalks where First and Second cross above the Ferry Street Tunnel. The travel lane on First appears to be pinched down narrower than the equivalent location on Second. Why are these different? I can see no reason for this to be so.
- While slick pavement markings are nice, they need maintenance. Troy has been very poor at maintaining pavement markings and there’s no reason to think that’s going to change much. This is especially a problem where underground utility work disrupts to markings; they seldom get restored. Moreover, few motorists, or cyclists for that matter, understand the green conflict zone thing.
- In the area west of Fifth, both Congress and Ferry are mostly lined with what are now beautifully mature black locust trees which would be tragic to lose. Some of these trees date back to the 1960s when the bridge and tunnel were first built. It would be a tragedy to lose them, but I understand that sometimes underground utility work and sidewalk restoration may make it necessary.
Comments specific to Alternative 1A
- The elevated bike lane through the tunnel is intriguing from a route functionality standpoint, but I think it would still be a somewhat daunting prospect. For one thing the noise from motor vehicles in the tunnel would be uncomfortable if not damaging to one’s hearing. Moreover I could see the tunnel becoming an attractive nuisance, with pedestrian encroachment bringing illicit behaviors, particularly at night. It could also be attractive as a homeless encampment.
- The on-street parking on only one side is reversed on Congress from it’s traditional north side to the south side; there are businesses who could justifiably complain about losing the ability for their customers to park in front. People can be this petty sometimes. On the other hand, those on the opposite side might welcome the change.
- Existing on-street parking is eliminated on both sides of Ferry between Fifth and Sixth. I don’t see any justification for this; refer to my general comments about the desirability to preserve on-street parking.
- The “two-way cycle track” on lower River is a waste of pavement markings.
Comments specific to Alternative 1B
- This alternative does not appear to offer any help for cyclists coming into Troy over the bridge to get from the intersection of River to the two-way path you’re installing on Congress.
- There are two locations on Ferry where the single lane approaching the next intersection goes through awkward divergence from the otherwise straight lines of the grid (at Third and Fifth). The one at Fifth still doesn’t really align with either of the two lanes (should be only one!) on the far side of the intersection. Oozing pavement markings only encourage oozing driving habits.
- I just don’t like two-way bike lanes. You get awkwardly close to opposing bike traffic where I’ve had to use these. Don’t like ‘em, and I actively avoid them.
- And the “two-way cycle track” on lower River is a waste of pavement markings.

Comments specific to Alternative 1C
- Same oozing misdirection on Ferry as in Alt 1B, and now you have a new one on Congress between Sixth and Fifth. No oozing.
- This Alternative unwisely retains the two travel lanes in the tunnel.
- The “two-way cycle track” on lower River is a waste of pavement markings.
- Sorry I can’t think of a more polite term, but the “contra-flow bike lane” on Liberty Street is one of the most spectacularly idiotic ideas I’ve seen presented in a bicycle transportation planning document. This is an unreasonably long detour away from the desirable downtown areas cyclists are presumably trying to get to and from. In real life few would actually use it. Biking against the traffic direction is something to be avoided at all cost! I have biked on Liberty hundreds of times and never felt the need for a bike lane; and if there was one that could send opposing bikes right at me I would NEVER use it!
- If you can’t give up on a formal bike route offering in lieu of none on Congress and Ferry, why didn’t you at least pick Division, which is a block less out of the way? Liberty and Division and both pretty narrow with not a lot of vehicular traffic (at moderate speeds, too), rendering them fine for cycling in the travel lane.
- Alternative 1C is by far the most attractive, with two exceptions: first the foolish diversion discussed above, and second the lack of needed improvements east of Sixth as discussed in my general comments above. The primary positive aspects are that it eliminates two-parallel-travel lanes west of Fifth (would be even better if also east of Fifth), maximizes on-street parking (again, should extend further east), and will provide a conducive environment for pedestrians, bicycles, transit and motor vehicles to coexist as safely as possible.

I attended the meeting on July 30. First, the presentation was terrible. The presenter spoke too quickly and did not enunciate, in spite of my request to do so. He seemed to be reading from what was on the screen, and that provided no clear differentiation between the options. There was no time provided for questions from the floor. You offered only one day notice of the meeting, perhaps you could have prepared a better presentation had you given yourself and us more time. This was wasted effort.

For some reason I am unable to open the downloads that describe the options. From what little I can understand about this, I suggest that option 1b is preferable, as rude people will park in the bike lane if it is available. On the other hand, most bike traffic is likely to be north/south rather than east/west so perhaps diverting to Liberty St opens parking downtown.

The common elements seem to make sense.

I am a homeowner in downtown Troy with my property located on 1st Street very close to Congress. I walk , drive and bike in Troy and actually commute by bike a few days a week to Albany. I am excited to hear that Troy has an interest in improving the quality of life of downtown. After examining the plans, only 1a and 1b make sense if you are trying to make biking a reasonable and safe alternative. NO ONE will use 1c to enter or leave Troy as it is out of the way and will become another path that no biker will use. I do favor 1B with a concrete barrier between cars and bikes which will be the safest and encourage more people to bike whether its families or students or visitors to Troy. It will slow down traffic which is good for pedestrians, children, bikers and business. And hopefully it will discourage the Valenti gravel trucks etc, who actually create damage to our roads just by their payloads. We must be looking toward the future and prepare for the connectivity with Watervliet via the Congress Street bridge. Downtown Troy does not have a drugstore or a supermarket and the closest ones are just across the bridge and many people walk and bike across the bridge, so we need SAFE connectivity. Shared bikeways and painted surfaces do not work, as drivers are so distracted because of phones or they just don't respect painted markings. This is well known by pedestrians and bikers alike. This is why concrete buffers are the ONLY way to go. There are many cities such as Seattle, Portland , Montreal that separate their bikeways and it has lessened the need for cars and encouraged the benefits of using bicycles. Please feel free to contact me and in the future, we need to have better notice of meetings. We also need to allow room for public dialogue.

I am passionately in favor of a plan that includes protected bike lanes. This would allow Troy to be positioned as a livable/walkable/bike friendly city that is a leader for change in transportation habits . Many cities have created bike lines which encourage tourism and home ownership. Of the 3 plans , only Plan 1b has a vertical barrier to separate motor vehicles from bicyclists. This is the safest alternative. I reject plan 1 C as it does not improve the current situation for bikes and in fact makes the situation worse.
I am a property owner and resident on 1 st Street. I bike, walk and drive in Troy and I want our city to embrace this improvement. Before making a final decision I am expecting additional meetings with public input and discussion .
I would hope that a plan to reroute the heavy truck traffic on Congress St is also up for discussion.

Suggestions:
• Make River Street One-way Southbound between Congress and Ferry
o This would provide room for a buffered continuous two-way bike path from Watervliet to Sixth Ave in Troy.
o If it is made two-way there is nowhere for the Northbound traffic to go except down Congress Street to Front Street which will only be Northbound once Taylor 2 is complete. This sends all traffic up the State St hill to a three-way stop intersection.
• Move the bike lane to the North side of the Congress Street Bridge
o CDTA shelter/station is on the South side.
o Bike traffic can then go north on a buffered 2-way bike lane to Congress Street and connect with the 2-way bike lane in proposal 1B.
Alternate 1A
• A bike lane and/or pedestrian traffic through the tunnel is not realistic and will likely not be used due to perceived safety and noise.
• A bike lane Eastbound through the tunnel will often not be used and bike traffic will use the West-bound one-way bike lane on Congress to go East.
Alternate 1B
• Best solution with comments above.
Alternate 1C
• Liberty Steet bike lane will not be used, and bike traffic will use Congress Steet and pedestrian way.
• This is a poor option.

Comments on the Presentation at Bush Memorial, July 30th:
• It was disappointing that there was not a proper Q&A session following the presentation. It would have been constructive.
• There were many professionals in the audience with experience in business, marketing, municipal planning and politics and they came away with the clear impression that the intent of the presentation was to sell Alternate 1C. This was a bad decision to approach the project this way. Alternate 1C is by far the worst option.
• After all the work done by Alta and the three public presentations back in 2021, where did Alternate 1C come from and what is driving this alternate other than a $1M lower cost?

Please feel to call me with any questions.

Hello! I wasn't able to make last night's last minute meeting, but the report I got from an attendee indicated that the plan currently preferred will reroute cyclists off the Ferry/Congress corridor, rerouting them on a 1/4 mile detour off the corridor via Liberty Street. I don't understand how that plan fulfills the vision described above to give cyclists consideration in downtown traffic design. If the goal is to make Congress and Ferry "complete streets," I don't see how you can meet that goal without incorporating cyclists into the corridor. Without including cyclists in the new downtown traffic patterns this project will create, I fail to see how it is a good use of public funding and resources. We might as well keep the roads in place until they reach end of their utility. The preferred plan seems designed to facilitate commutes for the suburbanites in and around Troy while offering little to the people in the denser neighborhoods. I greatly prefer either plan with either 2 one-way protected bike lanes or a combined 2-way lane on Congress. If the plan to reroute traffic outside of the downtown neighborhood is pursued, I predict cyclists choosing the most direct path and biking in the Ferry/Congress corridor anyway, which won't make things better for the cyclists or the cars.

Please post or send link to recording of Jul 30 public meeting. I was not able to attend owing to the short notice.

This is unacceptable the roads in south Troy are horrible yet another project for downtown. There has been extensive work done in burgh/downtown already! Please fix the roads in south Troy even just spot paving for needed areas would be a huge improvement! Thank you.

I prefer the bike path with the concrete median.

Hello,

Thank you for the thoughtful presentation of the proposed plan this evening (30JUL2024).
A few comments:

1) Neither 1A, 1B, or 1C looked at improving the intersection between Ferry Street, Congress Street, and Eighth Street. Before going ahead with any of the plans, studying a road diet of this intersection would make it easier for pedestrians to navigate. The overwhelming majority of pedestrians are students at RPI who live in the College Station suites immediately adjacent to the RPI campus or those living in the Downtown and South Central neighborhoods. Reducing the number of lanes from 3 to 2 (going from 1 turning lane and two travel lanes to one turning lane (onto 8th) and one travel lane) in both directions would allow for the street to be narrowed and could be coupled with raised walkways and signal improvements to facilitate access through a challenging intersection. I strongly encourage you to consider studying this intersection for improvement. The fact that it is not necessarily problematic as it exists does not mean it can’t be improved.

2) As a Trustee of the Troy Public Library I am a strong proponent of option 1A for the improved rehabilitation and reconfiguration of the Sage Tunnel. The creation of the tunnel (approved by the Library well, well before I was born and in hindsight from older Trustees and Library representatives, a poor choice in hindsight) has done a significant amount of structural damage to the building, including settling that caused cracks throughout the structure and the caustic effect of car exhaust deteriorating the marble facade. But beyond architecturally, the Library’s services are deleteriously impacted by the vehicular traffic. Traffic can be heard from the Children’s room, the Troy Room (where archival material is stored) and the first floor of the stacks. Reducing the traffic lanes, adding a bicycle lane, and improving the venting and most importantly, reducing the noise coming from the tunnel would be a significant boon for the Library and the services we offer while enhancing the space as an oasis for all patrons. In addition, the Lighting on the sidewalks that line the Sage Tunnel should be improved from its present condition, which is minimal. The sidewalk servicing the Ferry St. entrance of the Library has one light, which mainly serves to illuminate the Court House Parking lot. Due to constraints placed upon us by historic structure authorities, we cannot install floodlights or improve the existing lighting on the Library building, leading to the sidewalk being dark. A similar situation is present on the Russel Sage side of Ferry St. Improving the lighting makes the pedestrian access easier, and safer. Please consider this when finalizing improvements to Ferry Street.

Finally, as a citizen, I believe that you should consider combining the Ferry Street improvements from 1A with the Congress Street improvements in 1B, and make all the bike lanes buffered.

I’m against 1C as increasing the amount of parking Downtown only induces demand for car traffic. The majority of businesses in Troy are supported by people who access the businesses as pedestrians, not individuals who drive to them. There are numerous studies from urban municipalities across the country that confirm this.

Thank you for your time. I appreciate you reading my thoughts, and hope they both are logical and reasonable and worth considering.