TZ Vista Traffic Impact Study

Transcription

1 TZ Vista Traffic Impact Study A. INTRODUCTION This Traffic Impact Study (TIS) provides a detailed analysis to assess the potential traffic and transportation impacts of the TZ Vista multi-family residential project (the Proposed Project ). The Proposed Project is to be located at 25 and 26 Lydecker Street and 41 and 55 Gedney Street (the Project Site ) in the Village of Nyack, NY and is proposed to comprise of 128 residential units located within three buildings, an accessory café, 263 parking spaces and a pedestrian walkway along the Hudson River. Potential impacts of the Proposed Project were analyzed using the Synchro 8 traffic analysis software (latest version approved by NYSDOT) to calculate existing and future traffic operating conditions (Level of Service, average delay, and queuing) at each of the Study Area intersections. The TIS describes traffic conditions for existing conditions within the Study Area and for conditions in the future without the Proposed Project (the No Build analysis), and in the future with the Proposed Project (the Build analysis). B. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A quantified traffic analysis was conducted at thirteen (13) intersections in the vicinity of the Project Site for the Weekday AM, Weekday PM, and Saturday Midday peak hours to assess the potential effects of the Proposed Project on the area traffic network. Roadway geometry, traffic control device, and traffic (vehicle, pedestrian, bike) volume count data was collected. In order to estimate 2017 existing traffic conditions during the peak summer months, the following adjustments were made to the 2017 February/April counts: A New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) seasonal adjustment factor of 1.25 was applied to the existing counts. The traffic generated by the Nyack Boat Club was added to the existing counts. The potential effects of project related traffic on the area traffic network was assessed by comparing future traffic conditions without the Proposed Project to the future traffic conditions with the Proposed Project. An evaluation of on-street parking on nearby streets was conducted. As part of this assessment, hourly parking counts were conducted to determine the existing capacity and demand on nearby streets. On-street parking in the study area was found to be at its highest utilization during the weekday evening and Saturday evening hours. During these time periods restaurants and 1 The Proposed Project is anticipated to be completed in /24/17

2 businesses along Main Street are busy and residents (particularly those with single car driveways) on nearby local streets may begin to search for overnight on-street parking. In order to establish future 2019 traffic volumes without the Proposed Project (No Build Conditions), NYSDOT and the Village s Traffic Consultant were contacted for information regarding traffic growth rates for the area and No Build projects. An annual growth rate of 0.5 percent was provided by both NYSDOT and the Village for use in this study and applied to the 2017 Existing traffic volumes. Five future projects were identified by the Village in the area: Nyack Pavion, 48 South Franklin Street, 263 Main Street, Montclare, and Gateway Lofts. Vehicle trips from these projects also were assigned to the study area intersections. Future 2019 traffic volumes with the Proposed Project (Build) conditions were determined by adding and assigning project generated traffic to the 2019 No Build traffic. Estimates for the site traffic were based on trip generation rates provided in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (9th Edition). A comparison of the 2019 No Build and 2019 Build analyses revealed that one of the study area intersection movements (the eastbound approach of the Main Street and /South Broadway intersection) would experience an impact with a continued operation at Level of Service (LOS). The impact could be mitigated with signal retimings (reallocation of signal green time from one phase to another) at that intersection. No other impacts were identified. Vehicular ingress and egress to the parking garage would be provided in a single location on Main Street, close to the intersection with Gedney Street. Pedestrian access to the site would be provided in numerous locations along Main Street and Gedney Street. Public access to and through the site would be provided from the Main Street and Water Street intersection, as well as across the garage podium from High Street. The Proposed Project would include a total of 263 parking spaces. Of these, 236 would be provided within the parking garage. The remaining 27 parking spaces would be provided within two surface parking lots on Lydecker Street. The proposed surface parking satisfies the Village Code requirement for public parking (22 parking spaces or 10 percent of the required number of parking spaces). In addition, the garage includes 22 parking spaces for the residents of Clermont Condominium Association. These parking spaces will replace surface parking presently on Lot 2 (41 Gedney Street) for the use by the Clermont Condominium Association. The proposed 263 parking spaces satisfies the Village Code and exceeds the average peak parking demand based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) data. Therefore, residents are not expected to require the use of on street parking. C. EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY AREA AND DATA COLLECTION PROGRAM To assess the traffic impacts associated with the Proposed Project, a study area was identified that considered key intersections that might be affected by Project-generated trips. A total of 13 locations were identified for analysis, as shown in Figure 1. These intersections are: 1. Main Street and /South Broadway 2. Main Street and Piermont Avenue 3. Main Street and Gedney Street 4. Gedney Street and Lydecker Street 5. Gedney Street and High Avenue 6. Gedney Street and 1st Avenue 4/24/17 2

3 Co u rt Stree ay eet Ce dar S tr treet Stree t Bu rd S et adw ay ar H ill Av enu Division Aven e 5 S tr e et 4 3 treet et Sp ea rs tree ree t n Stre ue Hudson River t R5UBH E1UBL6 ue Legend 1 So uth B ro Depot Place C ed Lyde cker 2 Re ms e Aven 6 1 y Stre Nyack P la za Hu dson Aven ue Libe rt South Franklin Street De p ew 7 adw ay eet Main S venu e e 1 0 No rth B ro Pa rk Str e et treet Bridge S High Ave n ue Ne w S tr 2nd A nt Av enue North 1st A v enu Ch urc h 8 11 Pierm o Drive w Mario n Jeffe rson S Stre et s Av enue 4th A ve nu e Cou rt S t treet 1 3 3rd A ven u e Fran klin Sick le Ackerman Place t 4/21/2017 Ha ve n FEET Project Site Analyzed Intersection TZ VISTA Traffic Study Area Intersections Figure 1

4 7. Gedney Street and 2nd Avenue 8. Gedney Street and 3rd Avenue 9. Gedney Street and 4th Avenue 10. and 1st Avenue 11. and 2nd Avenue 12. and 3rd Avenue 13. and 4th Avenue Manual turning movement counts were collected at all the Study Area intersections during the weekday AM (7:00 AM 9:00 AM), weekday PM (3:00 PM 6:00 PM), and Saturday morning/midday (10:00 AM 2:00 PM) peak periods. Data collection sheets are provided in Appendix A. Existing traffic conditions at the 13 study area intersections were established based on traffic counts conducted in February and April The highest volumes (February or April) were utilized in the study. Generally, the April counts were higher. Therefore, the existing volumes utilized in the study reflect April conditions. At the request of the Village the April counts were seasonally adjusted to reflect peak summer conditions. The following adjustments were applied to the April counts: A summer (August) adjustment factor of 1.25 was applied to the April counts. This factor was developed based on NYSDOT seasonal adjustment factor data. The adjacent Nyack Boat Club was not in operation during the April counts. The traffic generated by the boat club was determined based on data presented in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. The traffic generated by the boat club was added to seasonally adjusted traffic volumes. The analysis presented in the TIS is conservative because the seasonally adjusted volumes (August) utilized in the capacity analysis also includes weekday school traffic (from the April counts). The NYSDOT seasonal adjustment factor data and the trip generation/trip assignment for the Nyack Boat Club are provided in Appendix A. Field inventories of roadway geometry and signal timings/phasings were also conducted to provide the appropriate inputs to the operational analyses. Signal timing plans were also provided by the Village for the Main Street and /South Broadway intersection. Field inventories and traffic signal timing plans are provided in Appendix A. To assess on-street parking conditions in the area, parking counts were conducted on an hourly basis to determine parking demand within the study area. These parking counts were conducted along the following roadways as shown in Figure 2: 1. Main Street, between Gedney Street and 2. Lydecker Street, between Gedney Street and 3. High Avenue, between Gedney Street and 4. 1st Avenue, between Gedney Street and 5. Gedney Street, between Main Street and Ackerman Place 6. 2nd Avenue, between Gedney Street and 7. 3rd Avenue, between Gedney Street and 8. 4th Avenue, between Gedney Street and These parking counts were conducted during the following time periods: 3 4/24/17

5 4/21/ Miles Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, USGS, Intermap, On-street Parking Survey Locations Figure 2

6 Weekday morning (6:00 AM 10:00 AM) Weekday afternoon (3:00 PM 7:00 PM) Weekday evening (7:00 PM 11:00 PM) Saturday morning/midday (8:00 AM 2:00 PM) Saturday evening (5:00 PM 10:00 PM) Data collection sheets are provided in Appendix A. ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS The following is a brief description of the major roadways within the study area. MAIN STREET Main Street is an east-west roadway which is under the jurisdiction of the Village of Nyack within the study area. From its eastern terminus to its intersection with /South Broadway, Main Street is classified by NYSDOT as a local roadway. From its intersection with /South Broadway to its intersection with Highland Avenue, Main Street is classified by NYSDOT as a collector roadway. Main Street generally provides one moving lane in each direction and varies in width between approximately 22 and 34 feet within the study area. In addition to center line striping, pavement markings along Main Street in the study area include parking stall, crosswalk, stop line, and Fire Zone markings. On-street parking is permitted along sections of Main Street. There are no public bus stops along Main Street within the study area. Traffic controls along Main Street include a traffic signal at its intersection with /South Broadway. Pedestrian facilities provided along Main Street include sidewalks and crosswalks. Based on field observations, the pavement along Main Street in the study area is generally in fair to good condition. NORTH BROADWAY, SOUTH BROADWAY and South Broadway are classified by NYSDOT as collector roadways and generally traverse in a north-south direction within the study area. Both roadways are under the jurisdiction of the Village of Nyack. and South Broadway generally provide one moving lane in each direction and vary in width between 34 and 37 feet within the study area. In addition to center line striping, pavement markings along and South Broadway in the study area include crosswalk, stop line, and parking stall markings and hatch markings to delineate areas where on-street parking is prohibited. On-street parking is permitted along sections of and South Broadway. There are no public bus stops along and South Broadway within the study area. Traffic controls along North Broadway and South Broadway within the study area include a traffic signal at its intersection with Main Street. Pedestrian facilities provided along and South Broadway include sidewalks and crosswalks. Based on field observations, the pavement along North Broadway and South Broadway in the study area is generally in good condition. GEDNEY STREET Gedney Street is classified by NYSDOT as a local roadway and generally traverses in a northsouth direction within the study area. Gedney Street Avenue generally provides one moving lane in each direction and is approximately 27 feet wide within the study area. There is no center line striping along Gedney Street. Pavement markings along Gedney Street include stop lines, Stop markings, crosswalks, and hatch markings to delineate areas where on-street parking is 4/24/17 4

7 prohibited. On-street parking is permitted along sections of Gedney Street. There are no public bus stops along Gedney Street. Traffic controls along Gedney Street include a stop sign at its intersection with Main Street. Pedestrian facilities provided along Gedney Street include sidewalks and crosswalks. Based on field observations, the pavement along Gedney Street in the study area is generally in fair to good condition with notable fading on some of the pavement markings. PIERMONT AVENUE Piermont Avenue is classified by NYSDOT as a local roadway and generally traverses in a north-south direction within the study area. Piermont Avenue generally provides one moving lane in each direction and is approximately 29 feet wide within the study area. There is no center line striping along Piermont Avenue. Pavement markings along Piermont Avenue include stop lines, Stop markings, crosswalks, and pedestrian warning symbol markings. On-street parking is prohibited on Piermont Avenue south of its intersection with Main Street. There are no public bus stops along Piermont Avenue. Traffic controls along Piermont Avenue include a stop sign at its intersection with Main Street. Pedestrian facilities provided along Piermont Avenue include sidewalks and crosswalks. Based on field observations, the pavement along Piermont Avenue in the study area is in fair to good condition with notable fading on some of the pavement markings. LYDECKER STREET Lydecker Street is classified by NYSDOT as a local roadway and generally traverses in an eastwest direction within the study area. Lydecker Street is a one-way eastbound roadway, provides one moving lane, and is approximately 22 feet wide within the study area. Pavement markings along Lydecker Street include stop lines, Stop markings, crosswalks, pedestrian warning symbol markings, parking stall markings, and hatch markings to delineate areas where on-street parking is prohibited. On-street parking is permitted along sections of Lydecker Street. There are no public bus stops along Lydecker Street. Traffic controls along Lydecker Street include One Way signs and a stop sign at its intersection with Gedney Street. Pedestrian facilities provided along Lydecker Street include sidewalks and crosswalks. Based on field observations, the pavement along Lydecker Street in the study area is generally in good condition with notable fading on some of the pavement markings. HIGH AVENUE High Avenue is classified by NYSDOT as a local roadway and generally traverses in an eastwest direction within the study area. High Avenue is a one-way eastbound roadway, provides one moving lane, and is approximately 22 feet wide within the study area. Pavement markings along High Avenue include stop lines, Stop markings, crosswalks, parking stall markings, and hatch markings to delineate areas where on-street parking is prohibited. On-street parking is permitted along sections of High Avenue. There are no public bus stops along High Avenue. Traffic controls along High Avenue include One Way signs and a stop sign at its intersection with Gedney Street. Pedestrian facilities provided along High Avenue include sidewalks and crosswalks. Based on field observations, the pavement along High Avenue in the study area is generally in good condition with notable fading on some of the pavement markings. 5 4/24/17

8 1ST AVENUE 1st Avenue is classified by NYSDOT as a local roadway and generally traverses in an east-west direction within the study area. First Avenue is a one-way westbound roadway, provides one moving lane, and is approximately 25 feet wide within the study area. Pavement markings along 1st Avenue include stop lines, Stop markings, crosswalks, parking stall markings, and hatch markings to delineate areas where on-street parking is prohibited. On-street parking is permitted along sections of 1st Avenue. There are no public bus stops along 1st Avenue. Traffic controls along 1st Avenue include One Way signs and a stop sign at its intersection with North Broadway. Pedestrian facilities provided along 1st Avenue include sidewalks and crosswalks. Based on field observations, the pavement along 1st Avenue in the study area is generally in good condition with notable fading on some of the pavement markings. 2ND AVENUE Second Avenue is classified by NYSDOT as a local roadway and generally traverses in an eastwest direction within the study area. Second Avenue generally provides one moving lane in each direction and is approximately 28 feet wide within the study area. In addition to center line striping, pavement markings along 2nd Avenue include stop lines, Stop markings, crosswalks, parking stall markings, and hatch markings to delineate areas where on-street parking is prohibited. On-street parking is permitted along sections of 2nd Avenue. There are no public bus stops along 2nd Avenue. Traffic controls along 2nd Avenue include stop signs at its intersections with and Gedney Street. Pedestrian facilities provided along 2nd Avenue include sidewalks and crosswalks. Based on field observations, the pavement along 2nd Avenue in the study area is in good condition with notable fading on some of the pavement markings. 3RD AVENUE Third Avenue is classified by NYSDOT as a local roadway and generally traverses in an eastwest direction within the study area. Third Avenue is a one-way eastbound roadway, provides one moving lane, and is approximately 24 to 26 feet wide within the study area. Pavement markings along 3rd Avenue include stop lines, Stop markings, crosswalks, parking stall markings, and hatch markings to delineate areas where on-street parking is prohibited. On-street parking is permitted along sections of 3rd Avenue. There are no public bus stops along 3rd Avenue. Traffic controls along 3rd Avenue include One Way signs and a stop sign at its intersection with Gedney Street. Pedestrian facilities provided along 3rd Avenue include sidewalks and crosswalks. Based on field observations, the pavement along 3rd Avenue in the study area is generally in good condition with notable fading on some of the pavement markings. 4TH AVENUE Fourth Avenue is classified by NYSDOT as a local roadway and generally traverses in an eastwest direction within the study area. 4th Avenue generally provides one moving lane in each direction and is approximately 24 to 27 feet wide within the study area. In addition to center line striping, pavement markings along 4th Avenue include stop lines, Stop markings, crosswalks, parking stall markings, and hatch markings to delineate areas where on-street parking is prohibited. On-street parking is permitted along sections of 4th Avenue. There are no public bus stops along 4th Avenue. Traffic controls along 4th Avenue include stop signs at its intersections with and Gedney Street. Pedestrian facilities provided along 4th Avenue include sidewalks and crosswalks. Based on field observations, the pavement along 4th Avenue 4/24/17 6

9 in the study area is generally in good condition with notable fading on some of the pavement markings. TRAFFIC CONDITIONS PEAK HOURS AND TRAFFIC VOLUMES Based on a review of all the traffic count data, the peak hours for the study area were determined to be as follows: Weekday AM Peak Hour 8:00 AM to 9:00 AM Weekday PM Peak Hour 5:00 PM to 6:00 PM Saturday Midday Peak Hour 12:30 PM to 1:30 PM Figures 3, 4, and 5 show the roadway volumes at the study area intersections for existing conditions (including adjustments made to estimate summer conditions) for the peak hours analyzed. CAPACITY ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY Signalized Intersections The operation of signalized intersections in the Study Area was analyzed by applying the Percentile Delay Methodology included in the Synchro 8 traffic signal software (latest version approved by NYSDOT). This methodology builds on the methodologies presented in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM2010) for signalized intersections and evaluates signalized intersections for average control delay per vehicle and level of service (LOS). LOS can be characterized for the entire intersection, each intersection approach, and each lane group. Control delay alone is used to characterize LOS for the entire intersection or an approach. Control delay and volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio are used to characterize LOS for a lane group. Delay quantifies the increase in travel time due to traffic signal control. It is also a surrogate measure of driver discomfort and fuel consumption. The volume-to-capacity ratio quantifies the degree to which a phase s capacity is utilized by a lane group. LOS A describes operation with a control delay of 10 seconds per vehicle or less and a volumeto-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-tocapacity ratio is low and either progression is exceptionally favorable or the cycle length is very short. If it is due to favorable progression, most vehicles arrive during the green indication and travel through the intersection without stopping. LOS B describes operation with control delay between 10 and 20 seconds per vehicle and a volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volumeto-capacity ratio is low and either progression is highly favorable or the cycle length is short. More vehicles stop than with LOS A. LOS C describes operation with control delay between 20 and 35 seconds per vehicle and a volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volumeto-capacity ratio is favorable or the cycle length is moderate. Individual cycle failures (i.e., one or more queued vehicles are not able to depart as a result of insufficient capacity during the cycle) may appear at this level. The number of vehicles stopping is significant, although many vehicles still pass through the intersection without stopping. 7 4/24/17

10 Gedney Street N th Avenue 6 4th Avenue 0 Driveway rd Avenue 3rd Avenue nd Avenue 3 Driveway st Avenue 11 1st Avenue High Avenue Lydecker Street Main Street Main Street South Broadway Piermont Avenue Figure Existing Traffic Volumes Weekday AM Peak Hour (8:00 AM - 9:00 AM)

11 Gedney Street N th Avenue 10 4th Avenue 0 Driveway rd Avenue 3rd Avenue nd Avenue 5 Driveway st Avenue 11 1st Avenue High Avenue Lydecker Street Main Street Main Street South Broadway Piermont Avenue Figure Existing Traffic Volumes Weekday PM Peak Hour (5:00 PM - 6:00 PM)

12 Gedney Street N th Avenue 15 4th Avenue 0 Driveway rd Avenue 3rd Avenue nd Avenue 17 Driveway st Avenue 6 1st Avenue High Avenue Lydecker Street Main Street Main Street South Broadway Piermont Avenue Figure Existing Traffic Volumes Saturday Midday Peak Hour (12:30 PM - 1:30 PM)

13 LOS D describes operation with control delay between 35 and 55 seconds per vehicle and a volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volumeto-capacity ratio is high and either progression is ineffective or the cycle length is long. Many vehicles stop and individual cycle failures are noticeable. LOS E describes operation with control delay between 55 and 80 seconds per vehicle and a volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volumeto-capacity ratio is high, progression is unfavorable, and the cycle length is long. Individual cycle failures are frequent. LOS F describes operation with control delay exceeding 80 seconds per vehicle or a volume-tocapacity ratio greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-capacity ratio is very high, progression is very poor, and the cycle length is long. Most cycles fail to clear the queue. A lane group can incur a delay less than 80 seconds per vehicle when the volume-to-capacity ratio exceeds 1.0. This condition typically occurs when the cycle length is short, the signal progression is favorable, or both. As a result, both the delay and volume-to-capacity ratio are considered when lane group LOS is established. A ratio of 1.0 or more indicates that cycle capacity is fully utilized and represents failure from a capacity perspective (just as delay in excess of 80 seconds per vehicle represents failure from a delay perspective). The control delay criteria for the range of service levels for signalized intersections are shown in Table 1. Table 1 LOS Criteria for Signalized Intersections Level-of-Service (LOS )(1) Control Delay Per Vehicle v/c ratio 1.0 v/c ratio > seconds A F >10.0 and 20.0 seconds B F >20.0 and 35.0 seconds C F >35.0 and 55.0 seconds D F >55.0 and 80.0 seconds E F >80.0 seconds F F Source: Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual. Note: (1) For approach-based and intersectionwide assessments, LOS is defined solely by control delay. Unsignalized Intersections LOS for a two-way stop-controlled (TWSC) and all-way stop-controlled (AWSC) intersections is determined by the computed or measured control delay. For motor vehicles, LOS is determined for each minor-street movement (or shared movement) as well as major-street left turns at TWSC intersections and for all movements at AWSC intersections. LOS is not defined for the intersection as a whole for TWSC and AWSC intersections. The LOS criteria for both TWSC and AWSC unsignalized intersections are summarized in Table 2. 4/24/17 8

14 Table 2 LOS Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections Level-of-Service (LOS )(1) Control Delay Per Vehicle v/c ratio 1.0 v/c ratio > seconds A F >10.0 and 15.0 seconds B F >15.0 and 25.0 seconds C F >25.0 and 35.0 seconds D F >35.0 and 50.0 seconds E F >50.0 seconds F F Source: Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual. Note: (1) For TWSC intersections, the LOS criteria apply to each lane on a given approach and to each approach on the minor street (for TWSC intersections). LOS is not calculated for major-street approaches or for the intersection as a whole. Note that the LOS criteria for unsignalized intersections are somewhat different from the criteria used in signalized intersections. At TWSC intersections, drivers on the stop-controlled approaches are required to select gaps in the major-street flow in order to execute crossing or turning maneuvers. In the presence of a queue, each driver on the controlled approach must also use some time to move into the front-of-queue position and prepare to evaluate gaps in the major-street flow. AWSC intersections require drivers on all approaches to stop before proceeding into the intersection. EXISTING OPERATING CONDITIONS Traffic operating conditions at each Study Area intersection were analyzed using the methodologies outlined above (see Appendix A) in order to compute delays, v/c ratios, and LOS as described above. During peak hours, LOS D operations are generally considered to be acceptable operating conditions for signalized and unsignalized intersections. As shown in Table 3 most of the study area intersection lane groups/approaches operate better than LOS D under 2017 Existing Conditions during the peak hours analyzed with the following exception: Main Street and /South Broadway The eastbound approach operates at LOS E during the Saturday Midday peak hour. A review of the Synchro 95th Percentile queue data shows that vehicle queues at the study area intersection approaches would generally not extend to or block the corresponding adjacent intersections with the following exceptions: Main Street and /South Broadway The eastbound Main Street approach (Saturday Midday peak hour), the northbound South Broadway approach (Weekday PM peak hour, Saturday Midday peak hour), and the southbound approach (Weekday AM and Weekday PM peak hours). 9 4/24/17

15 Table Existing Conditions Level of Service Analysis AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Sat. MD Peak Hour Lane V/C Delay V/C Delay V/C Delay No. Intersection Approach Group Ratio (sec) LOS Ratio (sec) LOS Ratio (sec) LOS Signalized Intersections 1 Main Street EB LTR B C E & /South Broadway WB LTR B B C NB LTR B B B SB LTR B B B Intersection 17.6 B 22.6 C 38.1 D Unsignalized Intersections 2 Main Street WB L A A A & Piermont Avenue NB LR B B B 3 Main Street EB L A A A & Gedney Street SB LR A B B 4 Lydecker Street EB LR A B B & Gedney Street 5 High Avenue EB LR A B B & Gedney Street 6 1st Avenue NB LT A A A & Gedney Street* 7 2nd Avenue EB LTR A A B & Gedney Street WB LTR A B B NB L A A A SB L A A A 8 3rd Avenue EB LR A A B & Gedney Street 9 4th Avenue EB LTR A B B & Gedney Street WL LTR A A B NB L A A A SB L A A A 10 1st Avenue WB LTR B C B & NB L A A A 11 2nd Avenue WB LR B B B & SB L A A A 12 3rd Avenue EB LTR B B B & SB L A A A 13 4th Avenue EB LTR B C C & WB LTR C B C NB L A A A SB L A A A Notes: EB = Eastbound; WB = Westbound; NB = Northbound; SB = Southbound; INT = Intersection. L = Left-Turn; T = Through; R = Right-Turn. V/C = Volume to Capacity; SPV = Seconds per Vehicle; LOS = Level of Service. *Analyzed utilizing the HCM2000 methodology.

16 CRASH DATA 2 Table 4 summarizes the most recent three year s traffic crash data for each of the study area intersections compiled from the NYSDOT and Orangetown Police Department records for the period of January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2016 (see Appendix A for NYSDOT and Orangetown Police Department crash data records). Table 5 summarizes the most recent three year s traffic crash data for each of the study area non-intersection locations (i.e., road segments between study area intersections) compiled from the same NYSDOT and Orangetown Police Department records. INTERSECTION CRASHES As shown in Table 4, the largest number of intersection crashes (19) occurred at the intersection of Main Street and /South Broadway over the 3-year period studied (January, 2014 through December, 2016). With an average of 6.3 crashes per year, this location could be considered as a High Accident Location (HAL) as defined in the Highway Capacity Manual (any location with 5 or more crashes in a 12-month period). The most commonly occurring types of crashes at this location (and overall at this study area intersections) was overtaking/sideswipe collisions. Many of these collisions involved sideswiping of parked vehicles or vehicles performing parallel parking maneuvers. Right-angle, left-turn, right-turn, and head on collisions were other types of collisions which occurred at the study area intersections. The most common crash factors at the study area intersections involved passing, parallel parking maneuvers, improper lane usage, driver inattention, and failure to yield right of way. There were no fatalities reported at any of the study area intersections in the records provided by NYSDOT and the Orangetown Police Department during the 3-year time period studied. NON-INTERSECTION CRASHES As shown in Table 5, the segment of Main Street between /South Broadway and Piermont Avenue had the highest number of crashes (4) over the 3-year time period examined within the study area. A lower number of crashes (3) occurred along the segment of Gedney Steet between 2nd Avenue and 3rd Avenue. The most commonly occurring types of crashes along these road segments were overtaking/sideswipe collisions. Many of these collisions involved sideswiping of parked vehicles or vehicles performing parallel parking maneuvers. Rear end, right angle, and fixed object collisions were other types of collisions which occurred along the road segments examined were reported at unspecified locations along Route 202/35. No HALs were identified among the road segments examined in the study area. The most common crash factors at the study area intersections involved passing, parallel parking maneuvers, improper lane usage, driver inattention, and failure to yield right of way. No fatalities were reported along any of the road segments studied. PARKING An evaluation of on-street parking on nearby streets was conducted. As part of this assessment, hourly parking counts were conducted to determine the existing capacity and demand on nearby streets (see Figure 2 for count locations). The observed peak parking utilization numbers and 2 Crash Data Records have been requested from NYSDOT and the Orangetown Police Department for the intersections of at 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Avenues. See Tables 4 and 5 for specific locations. This section will be updated when the requested records are received. 4/24/17 10

17 Number of Crashes Crash Trend Table 4 Study Area Crash Summary - Intersection Locations Intersection Avg/ Yr 1/1/14 12/31/16 Personal Injuries Fatalities Reported Non Reported Overtaking / Sideswipe Rear End Right Angle Left Turn (with other car) Left Turn (against other car) Right Turn Right Turn (with other car) (against other car) Ped/Bike Head On Fixed Object Animal Other Unknown Main Street and North Broadway/South Broadway Main Street and Piermont Avenue Main Street and Gedney Street Gedney Street and Lydecker Street Gedney Street and High Avenue Gedney Street and 1st Avenue Gedney Street and 2nd Avenue Gedney Street and 3rd Avenue Gedney Street and 4th Avenue and 1st Avenue (1) and 2nd Avenue and 3rd Avenue and 4th Avenue Source: NYSDOT and Orangetown Police Department (except where noted). Notes: (1) Data from NYSDOT only. Data for this location has been requested from the Orangetown Police Department. (2) Data for these locations has been requested from the Orangetown Police Department and NYSDOT. (DATA TO COME) (2)

18 Number of Crashes Crash Trend Table 5 Study Area Crash Summary - Non-Intersection Locations Main Street between North Broadway/South Broadway and Piermont Avenue Main Street between Piermont Avenue and Gedney Street Gedney Street between Main Street and Lydecker Street Gedney Street between Lydecker Street and High Avenue Gedney Street between High Avenue and 1st Avenue Gedney Street between1st Avenue and 2nd Avenue Gedney Street between 2nd Avenue and 3rd Avenue Gedney Street between 3rd Avenue and 4th Avenue between1st Avenue and 2nd Avenue between 2nd Avenue and 3rd Avenue between 3rd Avenue and 4th Avenue 1st Avenue between North Broadway and Gedney Street 2nd Avenue between North Broadway and Gedney Street 3rd Avenue between North Broadway and Gedney Street 4th Avenue between North Broadway and Gedney Street Avg/ Yr 1/1/14 12/31/16 Personal Injuries Fatalities Reported Non Reported Overtaking / Sideswipe Rear End Right Angle Left Turn (with other car) Left Turn (against other car) Right Turn Right Turn (with other car) (against other car) Ped/Bike Head On Source: NYSDOT and Orangetown Police Department (except where noted). Notes: Road Segment (1) Data for this location has been requested from the Orangetown Police Department and NYSDOT. (DATA TO COME) (1) (DATA TO COME) (1) Fixed Object Animal Other Unknown

19 percentages by block face are summarized in Table 6. Based on the on-street parking surveys conducted, on-street parking in the project area was found to be at its overall highest utilization during the weekday and Saturday evening hours (approximately 75 percent and 69 percent, respectively) as summarized in Table 7. During these hours restaurants and businesses along Main Street are busy as well as residents (particularly those with single car driveways) on nearby local streets may begin to search for overnight on-street parking. Peak parking utilization periods by street are summarized in Table 8. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE CONDITIONS The study area is characterized with moderate to heavy pedestrian and bicycle activity. Sidewalks and crosswalks are provided along most of the study area streets. Portions of Piermont Avenue, Main Street, Gedney Street, 4th Avenue, and are designated as NY Bike Route 9 the study area. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION No public bus or rail stops are present in the immediate study area. However, the Transport of Rockland (TOR) bus system operates bus routes nearby including TOR Routes 59, 91, 92 and the Tappan Zee Express. These routes operate along Main Street, west of the study area, and nearby stops are available on Artopee Way. D. FUTURE WITHOUT THE PROPOSED PROJECT TRAFFIC CONDITIONS The Future without the Proposed Project, or No Build, traffic condition is an interim scenario that establishes a future baseline condition without the Proposed Project. The No Build year is the same year as the Build year of the Proposed Project (2019). No Build traffic conditions are ascertained based on the following procedure: Increase the 2017 Existing Conditions traffic volumes by 0.5 percent per year from 2017 to 2019 for background growth, resulting in an overall growth rate of 1.0 percent. The use of 0.5 percent per year was based on guidance from NYSDOT and the Village. Include trips from pending developments (No Build projects) located in the vicinity of the TZ Vista site. Consideration of major roadway improvements in the vicinity of study area. A list of pending developments located in the vicinity of the project site was provided by the Village for inclusion in the future background conditions. These developments are listed below: Nyack Pavion 135 Apartment Units, 2,730 SF of retail space, Café (located on Cedar Hill Avenue, east of South Franklin Street) Traffic Study provided by the applicant. 48 South Franklin Street 3 Apartment Units, 2,000 SF of office space 263 Main Street 38 Apartment Units Montclare 48 Apartment Units (located on the northwest corner of the intersection of Main Street and North Midland Avenue) Traffic Study provided by the applicant. Gateway Lofts 33 Apartment Units (located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Route 9W, Route 59, and Main Street) Traffic Study provided by the applicant. 11 4/24/17

20 Table 6 On-Street Parking Utilization Survey Results - Maximum Utilization* Weekday Morning Weekday Afternoon Weekday Evening Saturday Morning/Midday Saturday Evening Max Utilization Max Utilization Max Utilization Max Utilization Max Utilization No. of Legal Spaces # % # % # % # % # % From To 1 Main Street (South Piermont Ave. - Gedney St. 0 2 Main Street (South Broadway - Piermont St. 0 3 Main Street (North Gedney St. - Broadway % 3 60% 5 100% 4 80% 6 100% 4 Lydecker Street (South Broadway - Gedney St % 16 89% 16 89% 10 56% 14 78% 5 Lydecker Street (North Broadway - Gedney St. 0 6 High Avenue (South Broadway - Gedney St. 0 7 High Avenue (North Broadway - Gedney St % 12 86% 13 93% 11 79% 12 86% 8 1st Avenue (South Broadway - Gedney St % 11 73% 12 80% 11 73% 9 60% 9 1st Avenue (North Broadway - Gedney St % 15 94% % 7 44% 15 94% 10 Gedney Street (West Main St. - Lydecker St Gedney Street (East Main St. - Lydecker St Gedney Street (West Lydecker St. - High Ave Gedney Street (East Lydecker St. - High Ave % 1 20% 1 20% 0 0% 0 0% 14 Gedney Street (West High Ave. - 1st Ave Gedney Street (East High Ave. - 1st Ave % 3 43% 9 100% 2 29% 5 71% 16 Gedney Street (West 1st Ave. - 2nd Ave Gedney Street (East 1st Ave. - 2nd Ave % 4 50% % 3 38% 4 50% 18 Gedney Street (West 2nd Ave. 3rd Ave Gedney Street (East 2nd Ave. 3rd Ave % % % 6 75% % 20 Gedney Street (West 3rd Ave. 4th Ave Gedney Street (East 3rd Ave. 4th Ave % 5 100% 5 100% 4 80% 8 100% 22 Gedney Street (West 4th Ave. Ackerman Pl Gedney Street (East 4th Ave. Ackerman Pl % 6 86% 6 86% 3 43% 7 100% 24 2nd Avenue (South Broadway - Gedney St nd Avenue (North Broadway - Gedney St % 8 44% 11 61% 15 83% 14 78% 26 3rd Avenue (South Broadway - Gedney St % 15 83% 17 94% 11 61% 14 78% 27 3rd Avenue (North Broadway - Gedney St % 11 65% 13 76% 7 41% 8 47% 28 4th Avenue (South Broadway - Gedney St % 11 61% 13 72% 11 61% 17 94% 29 4th Avenue (North Broadway - Gedney St. 0 Note: *Surveys conducted on 3/2/17, 3/4/17, 4/5/17, and 4/8/17.

21 Time Period Surveyed Table 7 Overall On-Street Parking Peak Utilization Summary (1) On-Street Parking Capacity (# of Legal Spaces on Surveyed Streets) Peak Utilization Hour(s) # of Vehicles* % of Capacity* Weekday Morning 9-10 AM 72 40% Weekday Afternoon 4-5 PM % Weekday Evening Approximately PM % Saturday Morning/Midday 12-1 PM 95 53% Saturday Evening 9-10 PM % Note: (1) Surveys conducted on 3/2/17, 3/4/17, 4/5/17, and 4/8/17. *Some illegal parking was observed on study area streets. Numbers shown are reflective of legal parking only.

22 Table 8 Parking Utilization Summary By Street (1) Street % Utilization (Range)* Main Street 40% - 100% Time of Day for Peak Utilization Weekday Evening, Saturday Evening Gedney Street 0% - 100% Weekday Afternoon, Weekday Evening, Saturday Evening Lydecker Street 56% - 89% Weekday Evening High Avenue 79% - 93% Weekday Evening 1st Avenue 44% - 100% Weekday Morning, Weekday Evening 2nd Avenue 44% - 83% Saturday Morning/Midday 3rd Avenue 41% - 94% Weekday Evening 4th Avenue 56% - 94% Saturday Evening Note: (1) Surveys conducted on 3/2/17, 3/4/17, 4/5/17, and 4/8/17. *Some illegal parking was observed on study area streets. The percentages shown are reflective of legal parking only.

23 For No Build projects where traffic studies were provided by the applicant, the trip generation and assignment data was utilized from these studies. For 48 South Franklin Street and 263 Main Street the trip generation for these projects was determined utilizing the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. Trips from these two projects were assigned to study area roadways based on existing traffic patterns. Appendix A contains the trip generation and assignment data for all the No Build projects. Based on the most recently published New York State Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) listings no major roadway improvement projects were identified in the study area. The traffic from the No Build projects were added to the grown 2019 traffic volumes to develop the 2019 No Build volumes. Traffic volumes for the 2019 No Build peak hours analyzed are shown in Figures 6, 7, and 8. Table 9 presents a comparison of the 2017 Existing and 2019 No Build LOS conditions for the study area intersections. Synchro 8 outputs for the 2019 No Build scenario are provided in Appendix A. Under the 2019 No Build conditions, there would be the following notable changes in LOS for the study area intersections: Main Street and /South Broadway The eastbound approach would deteriorate from LOS E to LOS F during the Saturday Midday peak hour. LOS E and LOS F generally indicate congested conditions and notable delays. A review of the Synchro 95th Percentile queue data shows that the same intersection approaches identified in Existing Conditions (see Section C) would continue to extend to or block the corresponding adjacent intersections. CRASH DATA No significant changes in the study area crash experience are expected under 2019 No Build Conditions. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE CONDITIONS No significant changes in study area pedestrian and bicycle conditions are expected under 2019 No Build Conditions. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION No significant changes in public transportation conditions are expected under 2019 No Build Conditions. E. POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Proposed Project consists of a 128 residential units with an accessory café, pedestrian walkway along the Hudson River, and 263 parking spaces. The Proposed Project would be located at 41 and 55 Gedney Street, and 25 and 26 Lydecker Street. The main portion of the Project Site 41 and 55 Gedney Street consisting of the residential building, café, underground parking garage, and pedestrian walkway, is bounded by Gedney Street on the west, Main Street on the south, Hudson River on the east, and the Nyack Boat Club on the north. In 4/24/17 12

24 Gedney Street N th Avenue 6 4th Avenue 0 Driveway rd Avenue 3rd Avenue nd Avenue 3 Driveway st Avenue 11 1st Avenue High Avenue Lydecker Street Main Street Main Street South Broadway Piermont Avenue Figure No Build Traffic Volumes Weekday AM Peak Hour (8:00 AM - 9:00 AM)

25 Gedney Street N th Avenue 10 4th Avenue 0 Driveway rd Avenue 3rd Avenue nd Avenue 5 Driveway st Avenue 11 1st Avenue High Avenue Lydecker Street Main Street Main Street South Broadway Piermont Avenue Figure No Build Traffic Volumes Weekday PM Peak Hour (5:00 PM - 6:00 PM)

26 Gedney Street N th Avenue 15 4th Avenue 0 Driveway rd Avenue 3rd Avenue nd Avenue 17 Driveway st Avenue 6 1st Avenue High Avenue Lydecker Street Main Street Main Street South Broadway Piermont Avenue Figure No Build Traffic Volumes Saturday Midday Peak Hour (12:30 PM - 1:30 PM)

27 Table Existing and 2019 No Build Conditions Level of Service Analyses AM Peak Period PM Peak Period Saturday Peak Period 2017 Existing 2019 No Build 2017 Existing 2019 No Build 2017 Existing 2019 No Build Lane V/C Delay V/C Delay V/C Delay V/C Delay V/C Delay V/C Delay No. Intersection Approach Group Ratio (spv) LOS Ratio (spv) LOS Ratio (spv) LOS Ratio (spv) LOS Ratio (spv) LOS Ratio (spv) LOS Signalized Intersections 1 Main Street EB LTR B C C C E F & /South Broadway WB LTR B B B B C C NB LTR B B B C B B SB LTR B B B C B B INT 17.6 B 18.1 B 22.6 C 23.9 C 38.1 D 42.6 D Unsignalized Intersections 2 Main Street WB L A A A A A A & Piermont Avenue NB LR B B B B B B 3 Main Street EB L A A A A A A & Gedney Street SB LR A A B B B B 4 Lydecker Street EB LR A A B B B B & Gedney Street 5 High Avenue EB LR A A B B B B & Gedney Street 6 1st Avenue NB LT A A A A A A & Gedney Street* 7 2nd Avenue EB LTR A A A A B B & Gedney Street WB LTR A A B B B B NB L A A A A A A SB L A A A A A A 8 3rd Avenue EB LR A A A A B B & Gedney Street 9 4th Avenue EB LTR A A B B B B & Gedney Street WL LTR A A A A B B NB L A A A A A A SB L A A A A A A 10 1st Avenue WB LTR B B C C B B & NB L A A A A A A 11 2nd Avenue WB LR B B B B B B & SB L A A A A A A 12 3rd Avenue EB LTR B B B B B C & SB L A A A A A A 13 4th Avenue EB LTR B C C C C C & WB LTR C C B B C C NB L A A A A A A SB L A A A A A A Notes: EB = Eastbound; WB = Westbound; NB = Northbound; SB = Southbound; INT = Intersection. L = Left-Turn; T = Through; R = Right-Turn. V/C = Volume to Capacity; SPV = Seconds per Vehicle; LOS = Level of Service. *Analyzed utilizing the HCM2000 methodology.