Exit 31 Planning and Environment Linkages (PEL) Study
Concept Screening Methodology Feedback Form

The Herkimer-Oneida Counties Transportation Council (HOCTC), in partnership with the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) Region 2, is undertaking a Planning and Environment Linkages Study (PEL Study) focused on the New York State Thruway (I-90/I-790) Exit 31 interchange at N. Genesee Street (NYS Route 921C) in Utica. The PEL Study aims to identify and evaluate conceptual design alternatives for the Exit 31 interchange and the surrounding roadway network.

The Study Team is developing screening criteria that will be used to evaluate each draft concept design alternative for the I-90 Exit 31 interchange, and we want your input to help us! This survey will take approximately 15-20 minutes to complete.
The project team will use a two-level screening process to evaluate the draft concept alternatives.

Level 1 reviews the full range of concepts to see which ones meet the project’s Purpose and Need. Concepts that do not meet the Purpose and Need are removed from consideration.

Level 2 then evaluates the remaining concepts using measurable criteria and technical analysis to identify the concepts that perform best.

This survey asks for your input on the criteria that will be used in this screening process.
_________________________________________________________________________
Level 1 Evaluation Criteria
Roadway System Connections
Purpose Statement
Provide a direct connection between Interstate 90 and Interstate 790.

Evaluation Criterion
Does the proposed concept feasibly provide a direct connection between Interstate 90 and Interstate 790?*

*For the purposes of this evaluation, “feasible” refers to whether a concept can be implemented in terms of technical or economic factors, such as technology, constructability, or cost. Based on stakeholder feedback during the PEL process, feasible would also consider extensive reconstruction or relocations of businesses, residences, and other roadways.
1.Do you agree with the evaluation criterion listed above?(Required.)
2.If no, please explain why you do not agree with the evaluation criterion.
Purpose Statement
Improve connectivity between Interstate 90 to NYS Routes 5, 8, 12, 49, and 921C (North Genesee Street).

Evaluation Criterion
Does the proposed concept feasibly provide increased linkages (e.g., intersections/nodes) in the roadway network between I-90 to NYS Routes 5,8, 12, 49, and 921C?
3.Do you agree with the evaluation criterion listed above?(Required.)
4.If no, please explain why you do not agree with the evaluation criterion.
Mobility and Accessibility
Purpose Statement
Improve accessibility for all roadway users on North Genesee Street, Leland Avenue, Auert Avenue, Wurz Avenue, Trenton Road, and Coventry Avenue.

Evaluation Criterion
Does the proposed concept feasibly allow for the potential addition of infrastructure to improve accessibility for all roadway users? This may include, but is not limited to, curb ramps, appropriate crossing distances, protected pedestrian crossings (e.g., High-intensity Activated Crosswalk Beacon or HAWK), and accessible transit stops?
5.Do you agree with the evaluation criterion listed above?(Required.)
6.If no, please explain why you do not agree with the evaluation criterion.
Purpose Statement
Improve mobility for all roadway users on North Genesee Street, Leland Avenue, Auert Avenue, Wurz Avenue, Trenton Road, and Coventry Avenue.

Evaluation Criterion
Does the proposed concept feasibly allow for the potential addition or improvement of mobility infrastructure which may include, but is not limited to, improved intersections and signal lighting, multi-use pathways, improved transit infrastructure such as bus bays?
7.Do you agree with the evaluation criterion listed above?(Required.)
8.If no, please explain why you do not agree with the evaluation criterion.
_________________________________________________________________________
Level 2 Evaluation Criteria
Objective
Improve freight reliability on Interstate 90 through the Exit 31 interchange.

Evaluation Criterion
By how much does the concept reduce travel time between I-90 and I-790, NYS Route 5, 8, 12, 49, and 921C (North Genesee Street)?
9.Do you agree with the evaluation criterion listed above?(Required.)
10.If no, please explain why you do not agree with the evaluation criterion.
Objective
Maintain acceptable levels of service (average delay at intersections) for a design period of 20 years in the PEL Study Area.

Evaluation Criterion
What are the resulting Levels of Service for signalized and unsignalized intersections under each concept and are they acceptable?

For the purposes of this evaluation, a direct connection between Interstate 90 and Interstate 790 includes connections in all directions, with the exception between westbound Interstate 90 and eastbound Interstate 790 because eastbound Interstate 790 terminates at Leland Avenue and does not make further connections to controlled access highways.
11.Do you agree with the evaluation criterion listed above?(Required.)
12.If no, please explain why you do not agree with the evaluation criterion.
Objective
Design should be developed for resiliency regarding long-term operations and maintenance of the interchange and local roadways.

Evaluation Criteria
  1. By how much does the concept reduce the number of highway lane miles at the interchange?
  2. By how much does the concept reduce the number of transportation structures at the interchange?*
  3. By how much does the concept reduce the number of ramps at the interchange?
* Transportation structures include toll gantries, highway bridges over roadways, ramp bridges over all features, and culverts under all features.
13.Do you agree with the evaluation criteria listed above?(Required.)
14.If no, please explain why you do not agree with the evaluation criteria.
_________________________________________________________________________
15.Please use the space below to define other evaluation criteria you think the Study Team should use to evaluate the concept alternatives.