To the Editor:

Let’s start by saying that the Albany County Helderberg-Hudson Rail Trail is an unquestionable asset to the area, enjoyed by hundreds of residents and visitors daily. Its solid paving and extensive wood fence installation make it a gem among comparable trails.

It is superbly maintained by a group of dedicated county employees and represents a grand cooperative effort with a variety of environmental advocacy groups, including the Mohawk Hudson Land Conservancy and Scenic Hudson Inc.

However, the county’s department of public works’ handling of the New Scotland Road (State Route 85) crossing component on the trail in Slingerlands has been less than stellar and represents a weak link in the otherwise well-run public program.

This is due not only to the latest incident involving the buckling of the new bridge’s horizontal support beams; the project has long been plagued by planning and construction missteps, for which taxpayers and vehicle drivers will likely “pay” well into the future.

Some background

When the county acquired the former railroad right-of-way between Albany and Voorheesville from CP Rail (successor to the Delaware and Hudson Co.) in 2010, the property included several large overpasses above area roadways.

The massive structures, designed to convey heavy steam engines and their cargoes, were installed by the D&H in the early 1900s to eliminate at-grade highway-rail intersections where the potential for collisions and delays existed. Roadways beneath the rail line were typically dug out below the surrounding lands so as to safely clear the overpass structures above.

But as maintenance declined over the decades, the structures themselves yielded their own safety issues, including spalling and falling concrete; plugged drainage systems; failing sidewalks; lack of adequate light; and, above all, insufficient clearance for highway vehicles that had grown higher and wider over the years.

After Albany County acquired the CP Rail right-of-way, several of the existing overpasses, including those over Delaware and Elsmere avenues in Delmar, were deemed salvageable, “patched up,” and incorporated into the new bike trail.

New Scotland Road overpass

The D&H overpass of New Scotland Road in Slingerlands, however, was more problematic: Its vertical clearance of 11 feet, 2 inches was well below current state standards and consequently subject to chronic truck strikes and traffic closures.

Additionally, due to poor drainage and winter salting, the bridge’s steel/concrete substructure was badly deteriorated; the sidewalks beneath it were barely passable.

Meanwhile, removal of the tracks on the line by CP Rail by 2005 had long since eliminated the highway vehicle-train collision concern and the need for structural grade separation on safety grounds.

Accordingly, when Albany County officially acquired the former rail line for biking and pedestrian recreation, the need to remove the decaying old structure at Route 85 was self-evident.

At that point, the county needed to focus on how to safely convey the new bike route over the resulting 150-foot-or-so “gap” on the trail caused by the removal of the old D&H overpass. To conduct that review effectively, the county and its engineering consultant needed to identify and assess a full range of crossing alternatives, from an at-grade dedicated crosswalk to installation of a new pedestrian-type overpass bridge.

A policy “detour”

At this juncture, however, the county’s formal evaluation process appears to have been detoured by a small but vocal group of Slingerlands residents in a non-productive direction. That group, alarmed by the possibility of increased truck traffic on New Scotland Road if a new, clearance standard-complying structure were installed, lobbied hard for the county and state to retain the old D&H overpass that literally and physically constrained the flow of trucks and other large vehicles into the hamlet. The local “Preserve Historic Bethlehem” campaign even adopted the deteriorating structure as an object worthy of “preservation.”

Those parochial concerns were prominent in the county’s public presentation and charette on the bike trail’s crossing of Route 85 held at the Slingerlands firehouse in 2019 (see county website). The only alternatives offered for public review were:

— 1. Retention and re-rehabilitation of the existing old structure for bike path use; or

— 2. Removal of old structure and its replacement with a new standard-compliant pedestrian overpass structure (see county website).

In fact, the first alternative — costly retention and re-rehabilitation of the old structure — was an obvious non-starter that had no practical pathway over time.

A missing alternative

More significantly, in the context of today’s developments, was that the county, in its 2019 public presentations, failed to offer a dedicated at-grade, pedestrian crossing (involving no structure or bridge) over Route 85 among its alternatives for evaluation.

Under such an alternative, bicycle and pedestrian traffic could be safely conveyed via a designated crosswalk along with, if warranted, a dedicated signal system. While involving the need for some brief wait times by both bicyclists and motorists, an at-grade crossing of Route 85 would have offered several enduring benefits:

— With no overhead structure, improved daylighting for Route 85 highway and its sidewalks;

— The opportunity to partially raise the existing surface elevation of Route 85, thereby reducing the swale beneath the former overpass, and mitigating water-pooling and improving drainage;

— With removal of structure support walls, the opportunity to install substantially widened and safer sidewalks along Route 85; and

— Above all, an alternative that would likely be orders of magnitude less expensive to install and maintain than an overhead structure.

In fact, safe at-grade crossing arrangements exist on numerous bicycle trails in the region, including on the Zim Smith Trail in Saratoga County and on the beautiful Ashuwillticook Rail Trail over State Route 8 near Pittsfield, Massachusetts.

Indeed, on the Albany County Rail Trail itself, smaller at-grade crossings of both Font Grove Roads and Hilton Road already exist and function safely.

The county selects its preferred option

As an at-grade crossing of Route 85 was not included as one of the alternatives, the aforementioned benefits were not considered in the project’s final crossing selection; the county’s engineering consultant recommended selection of Alternative 3A, removal and replacement of the old overpass with a new two-girder steel structure.

At the recommendation of the consultant, the new overpass was also designed to carry emergency and maintenance vehicles — even though such vehicles could access the trail via adjacent roadways and parking areas without use of the structure.

The effect of adding vehicle-carrying capacity to a lightweight pedestrian bridge substantially increased the amount of steel and concrete needed for the structure — and consequently its cost — for marginal safety and convenience benefit.

Faltering progress

In 2019, the county finalized its design selection for a bike trail overpass of Route 85 and began to prepare accordingly. However, for more than two years, little activity was observed at the site. The existing old structure sat, continued to deteriorate, lose concrete, and remain the subject of continued truck strikes.

Why the delay? For most of the two years, the county public works department offered only sparse explanations, including “awaiting steel for the bridge,”  the COVID pandemic, and “litigation.”

The last item proved to be the most telling factor for the long delay. It seems that during the early ground prep work for the new structure, despite warnings, the county’s contractor severed a well-marked Sprint fiber-optics cable that ran parallel to the former railroad right-of-way.

Little of this mishap and cause for delay, however, was shared with the public.

Sprint sued the county for damages and a state court ultimately found the county liable for over $1 million — increasing by 50 percent the initial $1.9M cost estimate for the new overpass project.

As most area residents know, the next major disruption in the rail trail’s progress at the crossing of Route 85 occurred only a month ago — the buckling of the bridge’s new horizontal support beams while a concrete deck was being poured. This mishap was even more severe and potentially catastrophic.

In other circumstances, the failure of the beams could have led to collapse of the structure and unknown harm to individuals working on it or driving beneath it.

Who or what was responsible for the latest construction failure? Presumably answers will be provided following via forensic investigation by the appropriate authorities.

Meanwhile, the costs and delays to the current project are hard to calculate. As Route 85 needed to be closed during most of the new overpass construction — and now for clean-up due to the latest mishap — drivers and commuters have been impacted by detours for months.

In addition to the congestion and work-hours lost, added vehicle air emissions and extra fuel consumption are a deleterious impact on the environment.

It goes without saying that many of these excessive costs and delays could have been avoided had an at-grade alternative at least been considered, evaluated, and perhaps opted for by the county’s department of public works and its consultants.

Next steps

The most important priority now for the county’s department of public works and the state’s department of transportation should be to fully reopen Route 85; efficient functioning of that highway is a necessity for commuters, school buses, emergency vehicles, etc., and should reasonably take precedence over recreational interests of bicyclists and pedestrians on the rail trail.

If at all possible, re-opening of Route 85 should preferably occur before the school season and/or winter begin.

Long-term questions

Once Route 85 in Slingerlands is fully opened and running, the county should then endeavor to provide answers to its residents and taxpayers on some of these critical issues:

— What entity was responsible for selecting and limiting the original rail-trail alternatives to only overpass structures for crossing Route 85? What was the basis for the choices?  

— Why were no at-grade crossing options of Route 85 (not involving a structure) considered or evaluated?

— What construction entity was responsible for severing the fiber-optic cable in 2020? Who is responsible for payment of damages?

— When an authoritative investigation is completed, what entity is at fault for the buckling and failure of the horizontal steel beam component of the new overpass structure?

— Can the county provide a thorough, sequenced, and orderly accounting of all project costs, comparing the original estimates with the actual cost, including those generated by delays and construction mishaps?

— How does the county propose that those additional costs will be covered?

As public taxpayer funds are associated with virtually all the above issues, little if any of the information should be considered proprietary.

Fuller transparency and accounting by Albany County, including on its website, will help restore public confidence in its troubled management of this key component on an otherwise very functional and enjoyable rail trail.

Ed Rosen

Delmar

Editor’s note: Before retiring, Ed Rosen served as head of the Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Safety Section at the New York State Department of Transportation from 2004 to 2017. He notes he is a regular user of the Albany County Rail Trail.