By Lauren Young
Staff Writer
Why does there always seem to be so much traffic in the village of Fayetteville?
The Syracuse Metropolitan Transportation Council (SMTC) answered this complex question at their public meeting for the village’s Route 5 Transportation and Land Use Analysis last Wednesday night at Fayetteville Elementary School.
From Route 5 congestion to the poorly-used route 262X express Centro line, Principal Transportation Planner Meghan Vitale of SMTC presented the study’s traffic findings along with possible solutions, from roundabouts to additional capacity on Route 290.
On behalf of Fayetteville, the SMTC conducted this study to measure historical and current traffic flow patterns and the anticipated impacts of future developments. Originally proposed by the village in response to a call for projects at the end of 2015, the study’s purpose was to identify ways the village could maintain and improve traffic patterns while developing existing, underutilized properties.
In September 2016, the SMTC Planning Committee approved the Scope of Work for the study. “A big part of the study has been conducting a travel time study,” said Vitale. “We went into this with the idea that commuters traveling from east of the village really have two options to get to Syracuse or points farther west: take Route 290 or Route 5. We wanted to know how do those two groups compare.”
To measure the traffic difference between these two routes, SMTC had 10 staff members travel with a GPS unit from the intersection of both routes to a point on Route 690 where the two groups converge. Performed over a period of eight weekdays in September and October, they sent cars out every 15 minutes during the peak periods between 7 a.m. to 8:45 a.m., then repeated the process during the 4 p.m. to 5:45 p.m. peak period. The project resulted in 24 runs in each direction during each peak period.
While the study knew Route 290 is shorter in distance than the Route 5 option, the results confirmed that the Route 5 option is indeed longer time-wise, more in the westbound direction by three to four minutes and a minute a half for the westbound direction.
The study noted more congested segments on Route 5 during the p.m. peak hour compared to the a.m. peak hour; a segment is considered congested if the peak travel time is 50 percent more than the free flow travel time. Westbound trips results showed that travel times were comparable between the morning and evening commuter periods, and eastbound trips had the greatest variability with an eight-minute range, from a low of 17 minutes to a high of 25 minutes.
After reviewing the existing traffic impact studies recently completed for proposed developments, the level of service at the intersection operates at levels of “C”s and “D”s, “D” being an “overall acceptable level of service,” said Vitale. By definition, level “D” is considered high density but stable flow of traffic, with level “A” being the lowest density of service.
“However, we understand that there are individual movements at these intersections that are operating at a level service of ‘E’ or ‘F,’” said Vitale, which indicated substantial delays during peak hours. Level “F” is the worst level of service, characterized by significant delays, poor progression and heavy density.
While the comprehensive plan calls attention to that traffic, it also acknowledges that widening roadways through the village “is seen as a threat to the village’s character,” said Vitale.
“One of the things we see clearly from the traffic data here is that Route 5 is much more than just a commute route,” said Vitale as she explained how businesses along that route generate traffic, making the segment between Highbridge Road and Salt Springs Road “the highest volume segment in the study area.”
While transit rides are always an option, they’re certainly not a widely-used one. The route 262X express Centro line in particular has a “very low ridership.” In fact, out of the 25 lines Centro runs, this transit line ranks 22 and, according to individual stop level data from 2017, “no more than about 15 people use the 262x service on a daily basis,” said Vitale.
Out of the approximate 2,300 workers in Fayetteville, SMTC found that only 19 percent work in the village, while 37 percent work in Syracuse and 40 percent work somewhere else in the region. “So those trips are very hard to serve for transit,” said Vitale.
Adding additional capacity to Route 290 was considered by the SMTC, as that would encourage more commuters to use that route instead of Route 5. However, results showed that relatively few trips would divert from Route 5 and the two-way volume on that route only decreased by about 70 vehicles during the peak hour. The model output showed less than a 20-second decrease in the total travel time on Route 5.
A roundabout at Route 5 and Route 257 was also discussed, as were two mini roundabouts. Roundabouts were originally proposed in a 2009 SMTC study that also examined signal modifications at that intersection, but eliminated the ideas due to accessed property impacts.
On Wednesday night, two conceptual, very preliminary, designs of the roundabout as proposed by the DOT regional office were presented.
“This would be a very large project for the region,” said Vitale. “We really are in the mode of preservation and maintenance on our transportation system. We don’t do many capacity building projects and this kind of project would have to compete with other regional needs for capital funding.”
As to why two eastbound travel lanes on Route 5 between Brooklea Drive and Chapel Street isn’t being discussed, Vitale said that it was considered by the DOT in 2009 and further investigated in 2013, but due to the insufficient accommodation for three travel lanes on the existing pavement from the center line to the curb, it was rejected.
“Restriping in this area would require repaving due to where the peak of the road is, and that would add sufficiently to the expense,” said Vitale. “It’s more than just paint needed to make this into three lanes.” Additionally, no accident patterns were studied that would allow the study to compete for safety funds.
For now, Vitale said the current traffic pattern works. “The current configuration allows for flexibility, and for parking when needed, and allows for vehicles to maneuver around a vehicle that wants to turn left,” she said.
A two-way left-turn lane on Route 5 east of Route 257 was also suggested, as the “accident history and number of accidents in this segment do indicate that a ‘twiddle’ lane could be beneficial,” said Vitale. There are, however, some concerns over the existing pavement width, as the current curbing is “not sufficient to accommodate a center turn lane,” she said.
The Fayetteville Village Apartments traffic study additionally asked for approval of an eastbound left-turn lane at one of the driveways, so a two-way left-turn lane could possibly be an extension of that. However, more investigation is needed to determine how much width of pavement is available, the width of the right-of-way, and how the existing pavement depth of the shoulders can accommodate for the traffic.
A westbound left-turn lane on Route 5 at Burdick Street was also proposed, though the DOT investigated this years prior and determined that the number of accidents did not indicate a need.
Currently, the congestion between Burdick Street and Highbridge Road carries the “highest volume of traffic,” as local trips and commuters intersect, said Vitale. “If you could put in new road connections that would allow those local trips not having to use Route 5, on paper that makes sense,” she said, but due to the existing space the SMTC does not view it as a “feasible option.”
By using a travel demand model, results indicated that 45 percent of that segment’s traffic has an origin or destination at a point in the village, about 25 percent farther east past the Route 5 and Route 290 intersection and about 20 percent south of the village.
The DOT is currently implementing a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan throughout the state, and will review intersections in Fayetteville for possible enhancements, which will encourage more pedestrian activity and community engagement.
For questions, concerns or input about the study, contact Meghan Vitale at mvitale@ smtcmpo.org. For more information on the council, visit their website at smtc.com.
