CGC41249

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

final

report

prepared for Town of Clarkstown, New York

prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

in collaboration with AKRF, Inc.

October 1, 2017 www.camsys.com

final report Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

prepared for Town of Clarkstown, New York

prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 38 East 32nd Street, 7th Floor New York, NY 10016

date October 1, 2017

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction ...... 1

2.0 Existing Conditions ...... 3 2.1 Study Area Description ...... 3 2.2 Study Area History ...... 3 2.3 Study Area Natural Systems ...... 5 2.4 Literature Review ...... 5 2.5 Land Use and Urban Design ...... 7 2.5.1 Land Use ...... 7 2.5.2 Urban Design ...... 10 2.6 Transportation ...... 13 2.6.1 Pedestrian Network ...... 13 2.6.2 Bicycle Network ...... 14 2.6.3 Transit Service ...... 14 2.6.4 Automobile Access ...... 15 2.6.5 Future Development Plans and Projects ...... 16 2.7 Demographics ...... 17 2.7.1 Age Cohorts ...... 17 2.7.2 Educational Attainment ...... 17 2.7.3 Household Income ...... 18 2.7.4 Poverty Rate ...... 19 2.7.5 Employment Status ...... 19 2.7.6 Employment Industries ...... 20

3.0 Public Engagement Program...... 21 3.1 Steering Committee ...... 21 3.2 Public Workshop & Engagement ...... 23 3.3 Stakeholder Outreach Interviews & Surveys ...... 25 3.4 Additional Review & Public Communication Opportunities ...... 26

4.0 TOD 101 ...... 28 4.1 What is TOD? ...... 28 4.2 TOD Guidelines ...... 28 4.2.1 Minimum net density: ...... 30 4.2.2 Appropriate floor area ratio (FAR): ...... 30

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. ES-1 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

4.2.3 Land use mix: ...... 30 4.3 Case Studies and Best Practices...... 30 4.4 Regional Trends in TOD ...... 32 4.5 Local Trends in TOD ...... 41 4.6 The Hamlet of Nanuet TOD Indicators ...... 43

5.0 Nanuet Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Plan ...... 44 5.1 Goals and Principles ...... 44 5.2 Zoning ...... 45 5.2.1 Overall Program & TOD Design ...... 49 5.2.2 Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Area 1 ...... 49 5.2.3 Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Area 2 ...... 54 5.2.4 Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Area 3 ...... 58 5.2.5 Hamlet Commercial (HC) ...... 63 5.3 Infrastructure ...... 64 5.3.1 Transportation Infrastructure ...... 64 5.3.2 Parking ...... 66 5.4 Programmatic Elements ...... 68 5.4.1 Civic Spaces, Parks and Recreation Facilities ...... 68 5.4.2 Pedestrian Space Design ...... 71 5.4.3 Public Buildings, Schools, Police, Fire Stations, Municipal Buildings ...... 71 5.4.2 Water, Stormwater, and Wastewater Infrastructure ...... 71 5.4.5 Light‐Emitting Diode (LED) Lighting ...... 72 5.4.6 Electrical Utilities ...... 72 5.4.7 Electrical Vehicle (EV) Parking ...... 72 5.4.8 Integration of LEED ND Design Principles ...... 73

6.0 Cost Estimates for Proposed Infrastructure and Programmatic Elements ...... 74

7.0 Implementation Strategy ...... 81 7.1 Short‐Term (1‐5 years)...... 81 7.2 Long‐Term (6‐15 years) ...... 82

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. ES-2 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

List of Figures

Figure 1: TOD area, Primary (Red) and Secondary (Blue) Study Areas ...... 1 Figure 2: Greater Nanuet TOD Area (Black Dotted Circle) and Demographic Analysis Area (Solid Red Boundaries) ...... 2 Figure 3: Erie Railroad Station, Nanuet – 1909 (Left) and Nanuet Mall – 1969 (Right) ...... 3 Figure 4: Town of Clarkstown Historical Population ...... 4 Figure 5: Relationship Between Built Environment and Topography and Flood zones (with TOD Area and Primary Study Area) ...... 5 Figure 6: Existing Zoning within the Primary TOD Study Area ...... 9 Figure 7: Age Cohorts, Town of Clarkstown &TOD Zone (source: 2014 ACS 5‐year estimate) ...... 17 Figure 8: Educational Attainment, New York State &TOD Zone (2014 ACS 5‐year estimate) ...... 18 Figure 9: Annual Household Income, New York State &TOD Zone (2014 ACS 5‐year estimate) ...... 18 Figure 10: Poverty Rate, Nanuet & New York State (2014 ACS 5‐year estimate) ...... 19 Figure 11: Employment Status, New York State &TOD Zone (2014 ACS 5‐year estimate) ...... 19 Figure 12: Public Workshop 1 ...... 23 Figure 13: Public Workshop 2 ...... 24 Figure 14: Public Workshop 3 ...... 25 Figure 15: Historic Trends in Trans‐Hudson Travel by Mode ...... 33 Figure 16: Mode Split by Origin for Trans‐Hudson Commuters to Manhattan ...... 33 Figure 17: Mode Share of Rail by Origin for Trans‐Hudson Commuters to Manhattan ...... 34 Figure 18: Atlantic Street Park, Main Street Hackensack ...... 37 Figure 19: Old Swackhamer Building, 122 Westmoreland Avenue, White Plains, NY ...... 38 Figure 20: Existing Zoning in the TOD Plan Boundary Area ...... 46 Figure 21: Conceptual Zoning Map ...... 47 Figure 22: Birds‐Eye View of Proposed Zoning Districts with Aerial Imagery ...... 49 Figure 23: TOD Area 1 Building Design Example 1 ...... 50 Figure 24: TOD Area 1 Building Design Example 2 ...... 51 Figure 25: Conceptual Rendering Intersection of Fisher Avenue and Prospect Street ...... 51 Figure 26: TOD Area 1 Conceptual Site Plan and Cross‐Section for Proposed Area, Bulk, and Density Regulations and Streetscape Program...... 53 Figure 27: TOD Area 2 Building Design Example 1 ...... 54 Figure 28: TOD Area 2 Building Design Example 2 ...... 55 Figure 29: Conceptual Rendering of Prospect Street West of the Rail Line ...... 55 Figure 30: TOD Area 2 Conceptual Site Plan and Cross‐Section for Proposed Area, Bulk, and Density Regulations and Streetscape Program...... 57 Figure 31: TOD Area 3 Building Design Example 1 ...... 59

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. ES-3 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Figure 32: TOD Area 3 Building Design Example 2 ...... 59 Figure 33: TOD Area 3 Conceptual Rendering of Prospect Street East of Rail Line ...... 60 Figure 34: TOD Area 3 Conceptual Rendering of Orchard Street (Southbound Perspective) ...... 60 Figure 35: TOD Area 3 Conceptual Site Plan and Cross‐Section for Proposed Area, Bulk, and Density Regulations and Streetscape Program...... 62 Figure 36: Conceptual Rendering of Streetscape and Beautification Enhancements to Main Street ...... 63 Figure 37: HC Conceptual Site Plan and Cross‐Section for Streetscape Program Along Main Street...... 64 Figure 38: Proposed Transportation Infrastructure Improvements ...... 65 Figure 39: Example of a Multi‐Use Path ...... 66 Figure 40: Example of a Multi‐Use Path ...... 68 Figure 41: Pocket Park and Street Furniture ...... 69 Figure 42: Pedestrian Crosswalk Improvements ...... 69 Figure 43: Urban Design Showcasing Consistent Street Frontages ...... 70 Figure 44: Example of Streetscape Beautification ...... 71 Figure 45: Example of Above Ground Junction Box Interfering with Streetscape in Park Ridge ...... 72 Figure 46: Identification of Infrastructure and Programmatic Project Areas ...... 75

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. ES-4 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

List of Tables

Table 1: TOD Area ‐ Transit Station Parking Amenities ...... 11 Table 2: Setback Requirements for Zoning Districts in the Nanuet TOD Area ...... 12 Table 3: Employment Industries, New York State &TOD Zone (source: 2014 ACS 5‐year estimate) ...... 20 Table 4: Nanuet TOD Plan Project Team ...... 21 Table 5: Nanuet TOD Plan Steering Committee ...... 21 Table 6: Summary of TOD Guidelines ...... 29 Table 7: Summary of TOD Case Studies ...... 31 Table 8: Zoning, Bulk, and Parking Regulations of Neighboring Towns ...... 42 Table 9: Proposed Area, Bulk and Density Requirements for TOD Area 1 ...... 52 Table 10: Proposed Area, Bulk and Density Requirements for TOD Area 2 ...... 56 Table 11: Proposed Area, Bulk and Density Requirements for TOD Area 3 ...... 61 Table 12: Cost Estimate of Bundled Treatment Packages of Proposed Infrastructure and Programmatic Elements ...... 76 Table 13: Planning Cost Estimate for Proposed Project Areas ...... 79 Table 14: Summary of Short‐Term and Long‐Term Strategies ...... 81

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. ES-5

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

1.0 Introduction

This planning study was undertaken to develop a transit‐oriented development (TOD) plan for the Nanuet Hamlet Center in the Town of Clarkstown in New York State. The objective of the TOD plan is to support the development of a transit‐oriented neighborhood, centered around the Nanuet Train Station and mixed‐use infill development that will link the historical downtown commercial district and the Shops at Nanuet, a regional outdoor shopping center. Developing a vibrant, walkable neighborhood will provide new workforce housing, encourage public transit use, create jobs, and strengthen the local economy. TOD is especially useful in achieving these goals and objectives because it prioritizes and encourages efficient land uses that create sustainable, attractive communities where people of all ages, incomes and backgrounds can live, work and play.

The Town of Clarkstown joins a growing list of towns and cities of all sizes all across the United States that are embracing TOD as a means of growing the local economy, maximizing use of existing infrastructure and increasing overall quality of life. National trends indicate that people are increasingly gravitating towards mixed use communities with access to public transportation. Given the Nanuet Hamlet Center’s proximity to New York City, Northern New Jersey, Westchester and local commercial centers, as well as its position on the Pascack Valley Rail Line operated by New Jersey Transit, the community, referred to in this document as the Greater Nanuet TOD area, is in an excellent position to reap the benefits of smart growth TOD.

SECONDARY

PRIMARY

Figure 1: TOD area, Primary (Red) and Secondary (Blue) Study Areas

The Greater Nanuet TOD area is defined as the area within a short (10‐15 minute) walk of the Nanuet Train Station, and as illustrated above approximately a circle with a ½ mile radius. Within the Greater Nanuet TOD area, there is both a primary and secondary study area (Figure 1).e Th primary study area within the TOD area focuses on parcels currently zoned as hamlet center, commercial, or light industrial office or those parcels adjacent to or one block

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 1 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan removed from Middletown Road (also known as Main Street or CR‐33) between SR‐59 and Church Street in Downtown Nanuet. The secondary study area is focused on the interface between the Nanuet hamlet and the Shops at Nanuet regional shopping mall. Shops at Nanuet is the largest employer and attractor of trips in the area. It is important that residents, employees and shoppers alike experience a safe and pleasant connection between the train station and the mall.

The TOD area is located at the intersection of four 2010 Census Block Groups (360870113021, 360870113022, 360870113023, and 360870113032). Although the TOD plan primarily focuses on the area within a ½ mile radius of the Nanuet Train Station, all four census block groups that form the Greater Nanuet TOD area were utilized for demographic analysis purposes. The maps below (Figure 2) illustrate the TOD area as a dotted black circle, while the four census block groups are outlined in red.

360870113021 360870113021

360870113022 360870113023

Figure 2: Greater Nanuet TOD Area (Black Dotted Circle) and Demographic Analysis Area (Solid Red Boundaries)

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 2 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

2.0 Existing Conditions

Existing conditions pertain to the physical setting, historical context, urban design, multimodal accessibility and current local demographic trends of the Hamlet of Nanuet. Combined, these features help illustrate the role that transportation has played in the historical development of Nanuet, as well as how it stands to further benefit in the future by embracing the full potentials of on‐site passenger rail service.

2.1 Study Area Description

Nanuet is a hamlet and census‐designated place in the town of Clarkstown, Rockland County, New York, United States located north of Pearl River, south of New City, east of Spring Valley, and west of West Nyack. Located approximately 2 miles north of Bergen County, New Jersey, Nanuet has one of three Rockland County stations on New Jersey Transit's Pascack Valley Line. The other Pascack Valley stations in Rockland County are located in Pearl River (approximately 2.5 miles to the south) and Spring Valley (approximately 2.5 to the north).

The Nanuet TOD area is located on North Middletown Road (also known as Main Street in Nanuet / CR‐33) running about ½ mile south of SR‐59 West (Nanuet) to Church Street. On average the corridor road right of way (referred to as ROW) is 54 feet, and is configured to include an 11 foot lane, 8 feet of parallel parking, and an 8 foot sidewalk in each direction. The corridor is primarily zoned Hamlet Center (HC), Light Industrial Office (LIO), Commercial Shopping (CS), and Regional Shopping (RS).

2.2 Study Area History

In 1797 the hamlet was named Nannawitt’s Meadow after a Kakiat Native American named Nannawitt1. In 1856 Clarkstown founder James DeClarke changed the town name to Nanuet, most likely due to mispronunciation. Nanuet's growth has always been linked to its accessibility to New York City. The Town’s early roads and railways, like later transportation infrastructure, played an important part in regional development. Nanuet can attribute its growth to the construction of the Erie Railroad in Rockland County in 1841 (Figure 3 ‐ left).

Figure 3: Erie Railroad Station, Nanuet – 1909 (Left) and Nanuet Mall – 1969 (Right)

1 “IF YOU'RE THINKING OF LIVING IN: Nanuet” www.nytimes.com/1989/05/07/realestate/if‐you‐re‐thinking‐of‐living‐in‐nanuet.html

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 3 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Later, during the twentieth century, several transportation projects had enormous impacts on the development of Clarkstown. The construction of the Palisades Interstate Parkway (1947) and the Tappan Zee Bridge (1955) brought immense changes to Clarkstown’s landscape, and led to the development which shaped the Town into the place it is today. With the rapid growth in population during the 1960s and 1970s and subsequent infrastructure expansion, the Town experienced an influx of business and industry (Figure 4). Small retail stores and strip malls developed throughout the Town, and several large firms located their offices and industrial works in Clarkstown. The Nanuet Mall, which opened in 1969, featured 101 stores in a fully enclosed two‐level complex (Figure 3 – right).

Figure 4: Town of Clarkstown Historical Population

100,000 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2014

The Nanuet Hamlet Center has continued to grow and develop through the turn of the century. The Nanuet Station, located on the Pascack Valley Line, offers access to Pascack Valley Line stations (Pearl River and Spring Valley in Rockland County) including Hoboken, the PATH which offers access to World Trade Center, as well as transfer opportunities to Penn Station, New York at Secaucus Junction and to other New Jersey stations including Newark, New Jersey and Newark Liberty International Airport. Ridership has continued to grow on the Pascack Valley Line, and infrastructure projects have been proposed which would offer a transfer‐free ride on the Pascack Valley Line into New York City. In 2007 the Rockland County Highway Department and Town of Clarkstown completed a Nanuet Hamlet Center streetscape revitalization project, which improved pedestrian infrastructure throughout the area. In 2013 Simon Properties completed construction on the Shops at Nanuet. This 880,000 SFn “ope ‐air” shopping mall redeveloped the former Nanuet Mall and has created new jobs and attracted a number of new shoppers from throughout the region.

In 2016, residents, business and landowners had the opportunity to voice their opinions and concerns on the direction and quality of life of the Nanuet Hamlet Center, as well as the entire Town of Clarkstown. Citing concerns of traffic, pedestrian safety and other important quality of life indicators, a comprehensive transportation corridor study was put together to explore means of better integrating land use and transportation planning in the local community. Focused on the Greater Nanuet TOD Area, this TOD plan aims to build off of Nanuet’s rich history, well‐established transportation ties and the desires of the local community as highlighted in the most recently conducted transportation corridor study.

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 4 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

2.3 Study Area Natural Systems

The majority of the Primary Nanuet TOD area is located in a low lying part of Nanuet (Figure 5). Located between two North‐South floodways and surrounded by acres of predominantly non‐permeable vehicle parking lots, the area experiences a high likelihood for flooding.

PRIMARY

Figure 5: Relationship Between Built Environment and Topography and Flood zones (with TOD Area and Primary Study Area)

In particular, significant flooding in the area was reported in September of 1999 when Hurricane Floyd struck Rockland County. Located immediately adjacent to the Nanuet Train Station, Prospect Street and Nanuet’s fire station flooded. The fire engine bays took in 3 feet of water, and the recreation room and parking lote wer inundated. As a result, a new fire station was constructed at a new location just south of the primary study area on Old Middletown Road that is better protected from local flooding. Similarly, following severe thunderstorms in 2011, numerous local roads in Nanuet were closed due to flooding, resulting in a State of Emergency for the County. Thus, any proposed development for the Study area will need to mitigate potential flooding.

2.4 Literature Review

The following local planning guides offer guidance to understanding the existing plans proposed for the hamlet center and its surrounding environment.

Clarkstown Comprehensive Plan 2009

In 2009, the Town of Clarkstown updated its 1999 Comprehensive Plan to examine the past, present and potential future conditions of the Town and works to serve as a reference and guide for land use decisions. The comprehensive plan has the following vision statement for the Hamlet of Nanuet:

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

“…A hamlet center with a small town feel, focused on the development and vibrancy of its downtown. The center will focus on quality dining and entertainment, as well as communal greenspace all defined by specific design standards. The center will provide a multimodal environment providing safety and accessibility for bicycles and pedestrians and will continue to advocate for uses important to current residents including housing for seniors and young professionals.”

Mid-Hudson Regional Sustainability Plan

The Mid‐Hudson Regional Sustainability Plan (May 2013) charts a path of both sustainability and economic development for its approximately two million residents that live in seven counties. Within the broad context of sustainable development, this plan outlines strategies to mitigate the effects of climate change. It aims to achieve this by managing land use, transportation, and materials to improve community health, reduce energy consumption, and protect agriculture, open space, and water resources. Rockland County, and Nanuet, are within the Mid‐Hudson region, and will benefit from a properly‐executed Regional Sustainability Plan. This Transit‐Oriented Development Plan for Nanuet will complement the pre‐existing Regional Sustainability Plan by using common performance metrics and using the regional plan as a guidance document.

Partnerships & Connections: Town of Clarkstown Commercial Corridor Transportation & Land Use Study

A comprehensive transportation corridor study was completed for the Town in 2016 that sought to rebalance transportation investment priorities and support the integration between land use and transportation planning. The study included an extensive analysis of existing conditions, documentation of community‐led corridor visions and development concepts, and specific zoning code alterations to support the goals identified by the Town and community.

As part of the study, a business and landowner survey was conducted and a series of public outreach meetings were completed. The survey sought to build on the vision established in the Town of Clarkstown’s Comprehensive plan as it relates to land use, zoning, transportation and overall quality of life in Clarkstown. Businesses and landowners in the TOD area reported that their primary areas of concern included traffic congestion, excessive road speeds, lack of parking, unsafe pedestrian crossings, and power outages. Survey respondents were concerned that the Nanuet Hamlet Center was lacking a “Town feel” and needed landscaping, preservation, improved signage, and building renovation. Respondents also requested additional options for senior and affordable housing.

Community members also felt that limited senior and affordable housing created a challenge to the corridor’s demographic visions. Regardless of the narrow roadway and parallel parking, members felt that road speeds were excessive. Finally, they noted that the existing zoning requirements and current mix of uses (especially light industrial office adjacent to the hamlet center and train station) were serious impediments to achieving the community vision.

The corridor vision as developed through community meetings includes the followingn goals: retai urban nature and small town feel; focus development efforts on ensuring vibrancy of its core, establish quality destinations (dining, arts entertainment, urban greenspace, etc.), and prioritize safe and convenient access to key destinations for bicyclists, pedestrians and public transit users. The ideal hamlet center developments will not displace current residents and be inclusive of housing and opportunities for seniors and young professionals.

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 6 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Hudson Valley Pattern for Progress – Urban Action Agenda: A Regional Plan for Urban Centers

The Hudson Valley Pattern for Progress’ Urban Action Agenda (UAA) is an ongoing regional planning effort that seeks to promote sustainable initiatives, including preserving green and open space, avoiding urban sprawl, and attracting and retaining population through informed urban growth practices. The UAA planning process is comprised of 25 urban centers within a 9‐county region of New York that includes the northern and northwestern suburbs of New York City, the Hudson River Valley and the southern and eastern portions of the Catskill Mountains. As a major transportation and commercial hub in Rockland County, Nanuet was identified as one of these 25 urban centers where growth efforts should be concentrated in order to further cultivate social, cultural, civic and economic activity. The ongoing efforts of the Nanuet TOD plan to establish a walkable, mixed‐use community centered around the Nanuet Train Station and Hamlet Center further work to advance those initiatives set forth by Patterns for Progress. These efforts will ultimately and effectively contribute to the sustainable development and vibrancy of Nanuet, while also serving as a bedrock for future TOD plans in the Hudson Valley.

2.5 Land Use and Urban Design

This section focuses on how the Town of Clarkstown’s current zoning districts are applied across the study area.

2.5.1 Land Use

The following zoning districts are present in the primary study areas2:

 HC: Hamlet Commercial ‐ The purpose and intent of the Hamlet Commercial District is to reinforce and protect the existing historic character of the hamlet by encouraging renovation and new construction which is in keeping with the local historic scale and character as recommended in the Town Comprehensive Plan. Locatede in th Town's hamlet centers, this district encourages the provision of pedestrian and bicycle amenities as well as apartments over ground floor commercial development.

 CS: Community Shopping ‐ This district offers goods and services that are needed by a larger segment of the town, including items of a more special nature such as clothing, banks and printing shops. This district does attract persons throughout the town but is not meant to be a major attraction to large numbers of shoppers from adjacent towns or counties.

 RS: Regional Shopping ‐ This district offers the full range of commercial shopping needs from convenience to shopping specialty items in a location that is on or immediately adjacent to major state highways, in order to handle shoppers from the surrounding region.

 LIO: Light Industrial Office ‐ The purpose of the Limited Light Industrial Office District is to permit the development of selected industrial uses on dland planne and suited to such uses but at the same time protecting the character of the surrounding residential areas or planned residential areas. Manufacturing operations are to be permitted only if they are incidental or accessory to the primary operation of the plant, or allowed by special permit of then Tow Board. This district is planned and intended for industrial land uses characterized by low land coverage, with large year‐round landscaped setbacks for protection of residential

2 From Town of Clarkstown Zoning Map. http://town.clarkstown.ny.us/PDF/Town_Zoning_Map.pdf

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 7 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

areas, attractive building designs and developing an industrial parklike setting. The regulations are designed to promote industrial developments using the highest acceptable planning standards to properly handle any obnoxious and objectionable external effects upon the surrounding residential areas, circulation systems, drainage and other natural features.

 MF‐1 and MF‐3: The MF‐1 and MF‐3 zones are established in order to provide additional housing opportunities in attached housing developments. These zones are designed for areas which can provide local services necessary to support relatively intensive housing development and where such developments will be compatible with the existing scale of development. As such, these zones are intended and to be located in the dense portions of the town's hamlets.

Figure 6 illustrates that the primary study area is comprised of a mix of residential, commercial, retail and office uses which generally conform with corresponding zoning districts. Regional shopping, in the forme of th Shops at Nanuet, occupies a bulk of the TOD area. Residential districts comprise an appreciable amount of the area, but are restricted to the east of the Hamlet Commercial (HC) District; the exception is one multifamily district (MF‐1) situated inside the Light Office Industrial (LIO) District, and below the Regional Shopping District, which is developed as a commuter lot. The Hamlet Commercial District lies in the middle of the TOD Area.

This zoning configuration poses some challenges to achieving transit‐oriented development goals. The district immediately abutting the Nanuet train station to the west is the Light Industrial Office (LIO) zone. The LIO allows light industry and office but does not allow residential uses. Recent changes to Clarkstown’s zoning codes have made it possible to include denser mixed housing and mixed‐use development and encourage alternative modes of transportation in the HC zone east of the train station, ebut th redevelopment of this area is limited.

Another zoning element that may pose challenges to TOD development is both height, and the number of floor restrictions within the TOD area; erecting at least 3‐floor structures will enable more compact development in critically‐accessible areas. A variety of opportunities exist to update the town’s zoning code that can help attract new businesses, beautify existing buildings, and increase connectivity and accessibility for all travelers. Various zoning changes can be made that will help create opportunities better‐suited for the community and future development of the Hamlet Center.

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 8 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Figure 6: Existing Zoning within the Primary TOD Study Area

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 9 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

2.5.2 Urban Design

The Nanuet TOD Area is considered a “downtown” area made up of small businesses located on small lot sizes (0.08 to 1.8 acres). Although this is a busy corridor with many retail uses, there are three key sites that shape the zone’s urban form: Shops at Nanuet, the Nanuet Hamlet Center, and the Nanuet train station.

Located on the former site of the Nanuet Mall mentioned above, the Shops at Nanuet is a $150 million development which opened in 2013. Designed as an outdoor mall with an “open air” main street, it features two anchor tenants (Macy’s and Sears), shops, restaurants, a fitness center, movie theater, and high‐end supermarket. The Shops at Nanuet has ample parking area (approximately 1.5 million square feet) and includes a multi‐bay bus stop with four shelters and a dedicated bus lane that is currently used by the Clarkstown Mini‐Trans. While the Shops at Nanuet covers 750,000 square feet and is recognizable as large‐scale retail, most commercial structures in the TOD Area are smaller, with multiple tenants.

The Nanuet Hamlet Center is located on North Middletown Road (also known as Main Street in Nanuet / CR‐33) running about ½ mile South of SR‐59 West to Church Street and ¼ Mile south of Shops at Nanuet. On average the public street (door to door) is 54 feet, and is configured to include an 11 foot lane, 8 feet of parallel parking, and an 8 foot sidewalk in each direction. The Hamlet Center is primarilyd zone CS and RS. Very little acreage is utilized for parking due to the age of the parcels and the fact that the retail activity is primarily small businesses (often with second floor residences) that are located on small lot sizes (0.08 to 1.8 acres). It is important to note that most of the buildings would not be approved if they were constructed under existing zoning requirements.

Nanuet Hamlet is unique in the context of Clarkstown’s typical urban form due to its high concentration of small one and two‐story buildings which support a variety of neighborhood shopping and professional office land uses. It is the only hamlet within the Town of Clarkstown with access to a train station. Corridor buildings are situated close to the street (minimal setbacks / buffers). The small block sizes facilitate pedestrian access, as does the presence of high quality pedestrian infrastructure. The roadway and sidewalks were recently resurfaced and designed with attractive streetscape features.

The Nanuet train station is a key destination within the TOD area. The track and infrastructure is owned by New Jersey Transit (NJ Transit) and leased to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s (MTA) Metro‐North Railroad (Metro‐North), and the transit service is operated by NJ Transit under contract with Metro‐North. The urban form adjacent the train station is predominantly comprised of parking and light industry to the west of the tracks, and light industry and mixed‐use residential/retail to the east of the tracks. The following parking facilities are present:

 Nanuet Train Station Lot 1 (Clarkstown Lot). The Nanuet Train Station Lot 1 is located on the south side of West Prospect Street near the intersection with South Middletown Road, on the west side of the train station. Lot 1 has 332 spaces, including 12 handicapped‐accessible parking spaces. No fees are required but a Town residential permit is needed. The lots are relatively close to commercial activities on Main Street. Some guide signs are in disrepair and may hinder access. There are no bicycle racks and travel lanes within the lot are tight and narrow.

 Nanuet Train Station Lot 2 (County Lot).The Nanuet Train Station Lot 2 is located on the north side of West Prospect Street further from the intersection with South Middletown Road, to the northwest of the Train Station. The lot has 229 spaces with 12 handicapped‐accessible spaces. No fees or residential permits are required. As with Nanuet Train Station Lot 1, while approximately 250 feet further west, the lot provides access to stores on

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 10 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Main Street. Some guide signs are in disrepair and may hinder access and there are no bicycle racks. There is no signage to the train station platform for pedestrians from Lot 2, and the available path to the platform is poor.

 Nanuet Train Station Lot 3 (MTA Lot). The Nanuet Train Station Lot 3 is located to the north of West Prospect Street behind the US Post Office. The lot has 235 spaces. The lot is owned by Metro‐North and operated under contract by LAZ Parking (www.rrparking.com) and not by the Town of Clarkstown. The fee for 16 hours (1 working day) is $1.25 and for 24 hours the cost is $3.25. Annual permits are also available for $21.68 (fee with tax). These spaces are furthest from the Nanuet Train Station.

Table 1: TOD Area ‐ Transit Station Parking Amenities

Parking Asset Spaces Utilization ADA Cost Nanuet Train Station Lot 1 332 At 12 Free (Clarkstown Lot) Capacity Nanuet Train Station Lot 2 (County Lot) 229 High 12 Free

Nanuet Train Station Lot 3 (MTA Lot) 235 Low 0 $1.25 (16 hrs) $3.25 (24 hrs)

The above table compares the three parking assets (Table 1). Given that the three parking lots are very close to each other, their land use profiles are similar. The existing land use is predominantly single family residential and multifamily residential covering over 50% of the area in walking distance. There are regional and community business centers near the lots, which make up to 35% of the area. A nominal share of the area (3%) is used for recreation activities. Providing pedestrian access to these locations will be instrumental in improving walkability and increasing non‐motorized trips to these locations.

Building Form Requirements

The Town of Clarkstown’s building form requirements limit the construction of tall structures in our study area. Regional Shopping allows for the tallest structures (height of 55 feet), while Hamlet Center (HC) allows for a maximum building height of 28 feet.

Setback Requirements

In the Town of Clarkstown setbacks differ between residential, commercial, retail and industrial uses. The following table summarizes the setbacks for zoning districts located within the Nanuet TOD Area.

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 11 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Table 2: Setback Requirements for Zoning Districts in the Nanuet TOD Area

Front Back Side HC: Hamlet Commercial None required when adjacent to 25 feet None required when adjacent commercial district, but 15 feet when to commercial district, but 15 provided feet when provided 20 feet when adjacent to residential 25 feet when adjacent to district residential district CS: Community Shopping 30 feet None required when adjacent to 50 feet commercial district, but 15 feet when provided 25 feet when adjacent to residential district RS: Regional Shopping 40 feet 50 feet when adjacent to non‐residential 25 feet when adjacent to non‐ district residential district 75 feet when adjacent to residential 37.5 feet when adjacent to district residential district LIO: Light Industrial Office 80 feet 15 feet when adjacent to non‐residential 40 feet when adjacent to non‐ district residential district 22.5 feet when adjacent to residential 60 feet when adjacent to district residential district MF‐1 & MF‐3: Multifamily 25 Feet from any private street 50 feet 50 feet 50 Feet from any public street 100 Feet from any state highway

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 12 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Landscaping Requirements

All zoning districts within Nanuet’s TOD area require minimum yard area on all sides of a structure. Residential districts (R‐15, R‐10, RG‐2) require the largest yards in the rear of the structure, the next largest in the front, and the smallest on the sides. This is consistent across Regional Shopping, Community Shopping and Professional Office districts. However, Light Office Industrial districts require the largest yards in the front of the structure and smallest yards in the rear, while Laboratory Office districts require equally‐sized front and rear yards. Hamlet Commercial districts only require a rear yard near residential districts.

Design Standards

The Nanuet Hamlet Commercial (HC) District is intended to preserve the look and feel of the hamlet center. The code states that its purpose is to “to reinforce and protect the existing character of the hamlet commercial center by encouraging renovation and new construction which is in keeping with the localc histori scale and character.3” This district follows a “Main Street Style” common to small towns in the region. Buildings are mixed‐use, with second floor residential or commercial space, and dwelling unit densities are relatively high.

Additional steps could be taken to further beautify the district and induce transit uses and pedestrian activities therein. For example, consistent design guidelines that detail clear signage and transparent building frontages with large windows would provide easy visual access to shops and their contents.

Consistent design standards will help ensure improved community, commercial and retail aesthetics that may spur pedestrian activities and draw future residents. Additionally, a welcome sign at South Middletown Road and SR‐59 West could improve the cohesive community feel and unique town identity. Design standards may help this corridor feel like a destination with attractive shops and restaurants. But to achieve this, town actions must be closely coordinated with local businesses (through a strong business improvement district, for example). A key element is ensuring that standards incorporate existing small‐scale parks (such as the Rose Garden) that are connected through greenways and protected bicycle and pedestrian linkages to the hamlet center. This would improve access to commercial activities in the HC district and improve non‐motorized transit options.

Design standards, in conjunction with zoning adjustments, infill development and business supported programming will help achieve this plan’s TOD development goals.

2.6 Transportation

This section analyzes the transportation access to, from, and within the TOD Area study area. This has significant impacts on the economic vitality of the areas, the safety and comfort of potential customers, and the overall identity of the commercial area.

2.6.1 Pedestrian Network

The Nanuet hamlet center has good foundational elements, such as a preliminary street grid network and a historic Main Street, to build upon. However, supportive zoning and infrastructure improvements would enhance these foundational elements to create a truly walkable and multi‐modal environment. For example, with the exception of a

3 Clarkstown, NY zoning codes, ecode360 (http://ecode360.com/search/CL0028?query=HC)

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 13 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

few blocks of South Middletown Ave / Main Street sidewalks, curb‐cuts, crosswalks and pedestrian signals are missing or substandard across Nanuet’s street network.

Numerous physical barriers exist in Nanuet that hamper pedestrian and non‐motorized activities. The lack of a complete, ADA accessible sidewalk network is one of the largest of these barriers, along with properly‐striped crosswalks, enforcement and education of proper crosswalk usage, pedestrian‐friendly walk signals at traffic signals (ones that are automatic and not push‐button activated) and all‐way stop signs. Additionally, long block sizes and wide street crossings discourage pedestrian activities, as do high vehicle speeds (even with a sidewalk present).

One of the major indicators of the potential for increased pedestrian traffic and decreased vehicle miles travelled (VMT) is the level of connectivity in a street network4. A dense, well‐connected street network gives bicyclists and pedestrians a wide range of options when choosing a route, and helps to decrease the speed of motor vehicles. Currently, Nanuet maintains a limited sidewalk program that is disjointed, fragmented, and disconnected from major activity centers. The only true sidewalk infrastructure of significance is the aging sidewalk along Main Street. While many commuters walk from adjacent parking lots, they do so on unmarked, run‐down, and severely deteriorating asphalt. By introducing new pedestrian infrastructure Nanuet has the potential to encourage neighboring residents to walk to the train station rather than driving, thus reducing VMT.

2.6.2 Bicycle Network

Bicycling is a popular recreational activity in Clarkstown and Nanuet, especially with access to various parks (Lake Nanuet Park and Mountainview Nature Park), state parks (Blauvelt and Hook Mountain) and the Hudson River within six miles of the TOD Area. However, cycling is less viable for casual cyclists who may wish to use their cycle to commute or make local trips in the neighborhood. While cycling should be encouraged for all ages, it is important to note that 12%5 of Nanuet residents are between the ages of 10 to 19; for them biking is not only a source of recreation, it is also a cost‐effective means of transportation and potent symbol of personal freedom.

Cycling infrastructure both within Nanuet and to access these resources is missing across the street network. This will be crucial to focus on in order to facilitate robust TOD development.

2.6.3 Transit Service

Local Bus Service

Two local bus services operate within Nanuet’s TOD Area. Transport of Rockland runs Routes 59 and 93, and Clarkstown Mini‐Trans runs Routes A, B, C, D, and E. These public bus services grant resident access to crucial retail amenities. In addition, the Clarkstown Mini‐Trans Route D provides service to the Nanuet Train Station, while Transport of Rockland Route 93 can be accessed through a short walk from the Nanuet Train Station.

Commuter Bus Service

Two commuter bus services operate within Nanuet’s TOD Area. COACH USA runs Routes 11T, 11AT, 20, 20T, 47, 49 and 49J, mostly with connections to the Shops at Nanuet. Saddle River Tours/AmeriBus operates Route 11C. The

4Ewing, R. and R. Cervero, 2010. Travel and the built environment: a meta‐analysis. Journal of the American Planning Association, vol. 76.

5 2014 ACS, 5 year estimate

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 14 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

TAPPAN ZEExpress is also an important transit service, with connections to multiple train stations (Spring Valley Transit Center, Tarrytown Metro‐North Station, White Plains Transit Center) shopping amenities (Palisades Center Stores at Macy’s and White Plains Galleria Mall), and locations in Nyack and White Plains. However, it falls outside of the TOD Area: Nanuet’s only stop is the Exit 14 Park & Ride stop, which is 1 mile northwest of the Shops at Nanuet.

Rail Service

Nanuet residents have access to Metro‐North’s (provided through an operating agreement with New Jersey Transit) Pascack Valley Line service. The Pascack Valley Line operates 7 days a week between Hoboken Terminal and Spring Valley, with direct services to the PATH system and connecting services to New York Penn Station and other New Jersey Transit rail lines available at Secaucus Junction. During peak‐direction rush hours, rail service operates at approximate frequencies between 15 and 30 minutes. During off‐peak hours, service operates approximately on an hour schedule with less frequent service available during the evening. It should be noted that for inbound service from Spring Valley to Hoboken, there are no trains in operation between 3:46 PM and 9:14 PM. On weekends, service is operated hourly and every other hour, depending on the time of day. This rail service is critical to residents and a focal point of TOD development; access to the New York City metropolitan area improves Nanuet residents’ access to jobs, education, health care and recreation.

Demand Response Transit

Not specific to Nanuet or Clarkstown, Rockland County operates TRIPS paratransit bus service. Both disabled (physical, mental, developmental, or intellectual disabilities) residents and those age 60 or over can use this service if they are unable to use the municipal, fixed‐route bus service.

2.6.4 Automobile Access

Nanuet is situated within close proximity to the region’s major roadways; offering easy automobile and bus transit access to employment, commercial, and residential centers throughout the region. Directly to the north, I‐287 provides east‐west mobility and access to Westchester County and employment centers in White Plains via the Tappan Zee Bridge, as well as north‐south connections along I‐87. In addition, running parallel to I‐287 is New York State Route (SR) 59. SR‐59 is a major commercial corridor that provides easy access to the north‐south SR‐304 and Palisades Interstate Parkway, and destinations in New dJersey an access to New York City via Hudson River crossings to the south. In short, Nanuet is positioned ideally for commuting via a number of modes (automobile, bus, and rail) to New York City, Westchester, and northern New Jersey.

Parking

Automobile access is dependent on the availability of parking. While Nanuet’s actual supply of parking may be sufficient, a lack of coordinated parking resources for the HC district creates a perception of a parking shortage. Park and Ride facilities can solve this problem, but they must be managed such that they do not impact station access for pedestrians. Additionally, parking resources adjacent to the HC District exist (large, often vacant lots at the Shops at Nanuet) but need to be managed so that people can comfortably walk to the train station and Hamlet Commercial destinations.

Community members have cited a lack gof parkin in close proximity to shopping destinations along Main Street in the heart of the Hamlet Center. To solve this problem they suggested shifting parking to the rear of buildings, creating angular parking and improving walking and bicycling infrastructure, or leveraging under utilized parking facilities such

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 15 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan as the MTA Metro‐North Railroad parking lot behind the Post Office. Other public recommendations include the creation of a shuttle bus that could connect the Hamlet Commercial District to less walkable parking lots and mixed‐ use development.

2.6.5 Future Development Plans and Projects

The following area projects may have significant impacts on the study area’s transportation system.

New NY (Tappan Zee) Bridge Construction

The new Tappan Zee Bridge, called the New NY Bridge, is slated to open in 2018. In order to meet the needs of residents on both sides of the Hudson River, a Mass Transit Task Force (MTTF) was convened to make assessments and recommendations for public transit across the New NY Bridge. The 31‐member MTTF recommended that a Bus Rapid Transit system operates across the new bridge. At present approximately $91 million has been identified to implement the Lower Hudson Transit Link (LHTL). The LHTL will provide an important, transit service to Clarkstown, and possibly Nanuet in the future6. In the short term, the bridge construction does not initially impact the Nanuet TOD Area, however potential remains to leverage Nanuet’s transit assets for multi‐modal connections in the future.

The first phase of the LHTL is being developed along the I‐287 corridor between Suffern to the west and White Plains to the east. The LHTL also includes integrated corridor management (ICM) elements that will improve traffic flow on I‐ 287 and other key roads in Rockland and Westchester Counties. Through these enhancements, the LHTL project aims to improve reliability and safety for travelers, improve the availability, accessibility and quality of transit services in the Lower Hudson Valley, and reduce travel times along the I‐287 corridor for all travelers.

Pfizer Pearl River Campus Redevelopment

The Pfizer Pearl River Campus (401 N Middletown Rd) is located approximately 1.5 miles from the Nanuet Train Station off Middletown Road just over the Clarkstown border in the neighboring town of Orangetown. This campus is of particular interest to the TOD project as it has a high potential for mixed use redevelopment. The sprawling 500‐ acre campus has been a big part of Rockland County's economic and social fabric since 1907. The company currently employs 1,300 employees; however, it is reported to be cutting its workforce down to 550 by 2017.

In 2015, Industrial Realty Group (IRG) bought 200 acres eof th campus including 38 buildings. Most existing buildings will be kept for uses such as biotech, medical tech, manufacturing and office space. IRG envisions using vacant land facing Middletown Road to create a mix of residential, retail, office space, a medical facility and a hotel that would attract employees (especially Millennials7) to live and work at the campus. IRG has prefaced its ability to hire qualified workers on its success in creating a vibrant urban environment that attracts businesses.

The Nanuet Train Station is closer to the planned development than the Pearl River station; thus it is likely that new employees will be using the station which will benefit the surrounding community businesses. The Nanuet TOD Area will similarly need to respond to the preferences of these new workers if it hopes to attract them and their families. Effective transit connections through improved local bus (or corporate shuttle) options could reduce potential congestion impacts on the area road network.

6http://www.newnybridge.com/mttf/

7http://www.lohud.com/story/news/local/rockland/orangetown/2015/12/01/pfizer‐campus‐millennials/76604922/

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 16 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

2.7 Demographics

Key demographic information describes the residents that live in Nanuet’s TOD Area, which constitutes a ½ mile limit around the Nanuet Train Station (Please see Section 1. Introduction and Overview, Study Area Description). This section explores six demographic points that were selected to assess the economic composition of the TOD Area, establish baseline data to compare against in the future (5, 15, and 30 years), and to act as possible predictors of Nanuet’s demand for TOD development: Educational Attainment, Employment Status, Employment Industries, Annual Household Income, Poverty Rate and Age. Comparing the residents of the project study area (TOD Zone – area comprised four block groups surrounding the Nanuet Hamlet Center) to the composition of the Town of Clarkstown and/or New York State as a whole provides a comparative understanding of the studies areas demographic conditions.

2.7.1 Age Cohorts

Town of Clarkstown TOD Zone

Figure 7: Age Cohorts, Town of Clarkstown &TOD Zone (source: 2014 ACS 5‐year estimate)

Age is an important demographic factor because for those that desire to age in place, access to transit and amenities is crucial. In addition to being able to comfortably access transit and amenities, seniors may want to downsize, which may increase demand for smaller housing units in the TOD Area. The pedestrian network is important to everyone, but it is especially important to seniors that come to rely more on transit if their ability, or desire, to drive decreases. For all of these reasons the needs of Nanuet seniors must be carefully considered in the TOD Area developments. As observed in eFigure 7, th population within the four Nanuet census blocks maintains similar demographic cohorts as the Town as a whole. Interestingly, of the senior citizen population, Nanuet maintains a larger share of the eldest members of the community and a smaller share of Boomers, as compared to the Town as whole. This may be an opportunity for and create a scenario where Nanuet could be a landing spot for Clarkstown Boomers wishing to age in place, if appropriate alternative housing stock is developed to cater to their new housing needs.

2.7.2 Educational Attainment

The TOD Area does not differ appreciably from New York State in educational attainment, except for two categories: high school graduate (includes equivalency) and bachelor’s degree (Figure 88). A higher percentage of residents of the TOD Area have a bachelor’s degree (24%) than New York State overall (19%), while the opposite is true for the

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 17 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan percentage of high school graduates: New York State has a higher percentage (27%) than does the TOD Area (23%). Because these categories are mutually exclusive, it is likely that the TOD Area has less residents with only a high school diploma because more of them have a bachelor’s degree.

Figure 8: Educational Attainment, New York State &TOD Zone (2014 ACS 5‐year estimate)

2.7.3 Household Income

Household income is the demographic with the greatest variance between New York State households and Nanuet TOD Area households. Households in the TOD Area Block Groups are wealthier than New York State households.

25% New York State TOD Zone 20.1% 20% 16.4% 14.3% 15.1%

Residents 15%

13.5% 11.8% 12.0% 12.6% of 9.9% 10.3% 10% 9.0% 7.7% 8.0% 7.3% 6.1% 6.5% 6.3% 5.3% 4.8% 5% 3.0% Percentage

0%

Figure 9: Annual Household Income, New York State &TOD Zone (2014 ACS 5‐year estimate)

New York State’s 2014 median household income is $58,687, compared to $103,577 for TOD Area residents. Nanuet’s largest household income bracket is $100,000 to $149,999 (20% of households) while New York State’s largest household income bracket is $50,000 to $74,999 (16% of households). Additionally, a significantly higher percentage of Nanuet’s households belong to the two highest income brackets, at 28%, compared to 13% of New York State households that belong to the two highest income brackets. It is also significant to compare the lowest‐earning

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 18 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan households: 28% of TOD Area households earn less than $50,000 a year, compared to 44% of New York State households.

2.7.4 Poverty Rate

Figure 10: Poverty Rate, Nanuet & New York State (2014 ACS 5‐year estimate)

Another important demographic is poverty. The United States Census Bureau defines poverty in the following manner, “if a family’s total income is less than the family’s threshold, then that family and every individual in it is considered in poverty…The official poverty definition uses money income before taxes and does not include capital gains or noncash benefits (such as public housing, Medicaid, and food stamps).8” Poverty is significant because it determines a household’s or individual’s buying power, demand for social services, and particular demands for housing stock. As evident from the annual household income chart above, Nanuet’s poverty rate is well below the State’s poverty rate.

2.7.5 Employment Status

Figure 11: Employment Status, New York State &TOD Zone (2014 ACS 5‐year estimate)

Nanuet and New York State do not differ greatly on unemployment status, as this statistic in both areas is between 5 and 6%. However, the two areas vary more in both the percentage of residents not in the labor force and those who are employed. 58% of New York State residents are employed, compared to 64% of TOD Area residents, and 37% of

8 United States Census Bureau ‐ https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/about/overview/measure.html

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 19 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

New York State residents are not in the labor force, compared to 31% of TOD Area residents. Though speculative, these statistics may be explained by a smaller percentage of retirees in Nanuet compared to New York State.

2.7.6 Employment Industries

Table 3: Employment Industries, New York State &TOD Zone (source: 2014 ACS 5‐year estimate)

Industry NYS TOD Area Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining 1% 0% Construction 6% 3% Manufacturing 7% 7% Wholesale trade 3% 4% Retail trade 11% 11% Transportation and warehousing, and utilities 5% 5% Information 3% 3% Finance and insurance, and real estate and rental and leasing 8% 9% Professional, scientific, and management, and administrative and waste 11% 11% management services Educational services, and health care and social assistance 28% 28% Arts, entertainment, and recreation, and accommodation and food services 9% 9% Other services, except public administration 5% 7% Public administration 5% 4%

The break‐out of the percentage of residents that work in different industries are similar between New York State and the TOD Area: in both areas 28% of residents work in Educational services, health care and social assistance, 11% work in Professional, scientific, management, and administrative and waste management services %and 11 work in retail trade. As mentioned, the differences between the two areas are small, with the largest variance found in construction: 6% of New York State residents work in construction compared to 3% of TOD Area residents.

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 20 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

3.0 Public Engagement Program

The project team developed an extensive public engagement program in order to draw from the expertise of local stakeholders and residents in the development of an effective and inclusive TOD Plan. The public engagement program additionally served the purpose of educating the public on the benefits of TOD, especially within the local context of Nanuet. The engagement program consisted of a steering committee, public workshops and stakeholder surveys. The following is a description of the project team, led by the New York State Energy Research & Development Authority and the Town of Clarkstown:

Table 4: Nanuet TOD Plan Project Team

Stakeholder Organization Role Contact, Title NYSERDA Project Manager Christopher Roehr, NYSERDA Town of Clarkstown Project Lead/Primary Contact Jose Simoes, Principal Planner Cambridge Systematics Lead Consultant Chris Titze, Senior Associate AKRF Sub Consultant Nina Peek, Senior Vice President Behan Planning and Design Sub Consultant Michael Allen, Senior Associate

3.1 Steering Committee

The project team coordinated a formal steering committee to represent a diverse spectrum of local representation of the Nanuet Hamlet. The steering committee included the Town Supervisor, Town Attorney, as well as members of the Nanuet Civic Association, Chamber of Commerce, School District, EMS and Post Office. Additionally, representatives from Simon Properties (manager of the Shops at Nanuet), NYSDOT, MTA Metro‐North Railroad and Rockland County Planning, were included in the steering committee. Throughout the project, the Steering Committee periodically met to assess project goals, project deliverables and advise the project team on current plan strategies. The Steering Committee included the following members:

Table 5: Nanuet TOD Plan Steering Committee

Committee Member Role Honorable George Hoehmann Town Supervisor Lino Sciarretta Town Attorney Risa Hoag Chamber of Commerce Susan Farese Chamber of Commerce Anthony Pallogudis Chamber of Commerce James Flynn Civic Association Roberta Bangs Civic Association Barbara Wallenstein Nanuet EMS Mark McNeil Superintendent of the Nanuet Union Free School District Vincent Carella Principal, Nanuet Senior High School Jeff Hutt Nanuet Post Office Honorable Edwin Day County Executive, Rockland County Douglas J. Schuetz Rockland County Public Transportation & Planning Helen Kenny‐Burrows Rockland County Planning Robyn Hollander MTA Metro‐North Railroad Thomas Weiner NYSDOT Todd Westhuis NYSDOT Ryan Hidalgo Simon Properties

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 21 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

These committee members were selected because of their local knowledge of the Nanuet hamlet, their experience with previous local planning efforts and their ability to represent and leverage discussions with the public.

A total of six meetings were held between the Project Team and the Steering Committee at the Town of Clarkstown Town Hall. Review materials and draft deliverables were provided to the Steering Committee in advance of each meeting. Notes from each Steering Committee meeting were also compiled and documented as a record of the project. A record and short summary of each meeting is summarized below:

Steering Committee Meeting 1

The introductory meeting was conducted on August 5, 2016 and introduced the consultant and project team. Additionally, the group discussed project opportunities and constraints, as well stakeholder feedback, land use, and the upcoming market analysis and property owner business survey.

Steering Committee Meeting 2

The second meeting was conducted on October 12, 2016 and the steering committee covered multiple items. The committee reviewed the draft existing conditions report to further assess and analyze the study. Additionally, the results of the business and landowner interviews was discussed. Key issues disseminated from these interviews included the following:

 Lack of parking within the Downtown/Nanuet Hamlet Center

 Traffic and travel speeds on Prospect and Main Streets

 A general need for improved connectivity between the Nanuet Train Station and the Shops at Nanuet.

Lastly, input was solicited for the Future Land Use and Market Analysis Report. The meeting concluded with the development of an agenda for the first public engagement workshop to be held in November, 2016.

Steering Committee Meeting 3

The Steering Committee met for a series of additional committee meetings throughout the Winter 2017 to review the market trends and to discuss potential TOD alternatives. These activities culminated in Steering Committee meeting #3 which occurred on March 20, 2017. During this meeting the group reviewed the draft TOD Plans ands Alternative document entailing the proposed development designs set forth by Cambridge Systematics. Additionally, the group discussed and planned for upcoming public workshops to be held at the beginning of April, 2017

Steering Committee Meeting 4

The fourth steering committee meeting was conducted May 5, 2017. During this meeting the results of the public workshops held on April 1 and April 3 were reviewed and discussed. Additionally, an initial concepts for the Final TOD Plan, that took public comment into consideration, was presented to members for review and comment.

Steering Committee Meeting 5

The final steering committee meeting was conducted on May 26, 2017. During this meeting the project team presented the revised draft TOD Plan to the Steering Committee from comments provide on May 5th, presented draft

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 22 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan presentation materials and discussed logistics for Public Workshop #3 that was held on June 4th. Lastly, the project team presented area renderings for each TOD area, and reviewed next steps to bring the project to completion.

3.2 Public Workshop & Engagement

Over the course of the project, a total of four public meetings were conducted to introduce the public to the project, present draft ideas and solicit additional ideas and suggestions. All comments and suggestions from the public during these meetings were documented, collected and organized into meeting summaries, including sign‐in sheets, photographs, copies of presentation materials, notes and a written summary of major findings. To advertise these public meetings, the Town of Clarkstown contacted all property owners in Nanuet via post mail with a meeting announcement and invitation. The announcement was also augmented on the Town website, a Press Release, as well as on posters and flyers which were posted in and around the project area in advance of each meeting.

A record and short summary of those meetings is as follows:

Public Workshop 1

The initial public workshop was conducted on November 16, 2016 in the Nanuet High School cafeteria. Within this meeting the project team introduced the goals, objectives and outcome for the project, a timeline in which the work would be completed, as well as how their input would be beneficial to the project’s development and progression. As part of the session, members of the project team worked with groups review potential areas of significance and what they would like to see from transit oriented development in Nanuet. The workshop was attended by at least 77 members of the public (those who officially signed the sign‐in sheet).

Figure 12: Public Workshop 1

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 23 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Public Workshop 2

Public workshop #2 was held on two dates, Saturday April 1st at 10:00 AM and Monday April 3rd at 7:00 PM, to provide a weekday/weekend option as well as a daytime/evening option to the public. During the second workshop, the public was presented with the draft TOD plan alternatives and was given the opportunity to provide feedback on the proposed designs elements. The input gathered from this meeting was used to help identify the preferred design alternatives to pursue further. 38 attendees signed the sign‐in sheet for the Saturday morning session and 39 attendees signed the sign‐in sheet for the Monday evening session.

Figure 13: Public Workshop 2

Public Workshop 3

Public workshop #3 was held outdoors on Sunday June 4th from 10:00 AM to 2:30 PM at the Greater Nanuet Chamber of Commerce Annual Street Fair. The project team maintained a booth at the northwest corner of Prospect Street and Main Street and presented the draft TOD Plan to the public through a series of visuals and walking tours. The public was receptive of the plan and solicited feedback by writing comments on a mounted comment board. Approximately 65 people visited the booth over the 4.5 hours, 19 people participated in the two walking tours, and 30 individuals signed their names on the official sign‐in sheet. The following image depicts a resident reviewing the draft Final Plan.

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 24 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Figure 14: Resident Examining Conceptual Zoning at Public Workshop 3

3.3 Stakeholder Outreach Interviews & Surveys

In addition to the steering committee and public workshops, stakeholder groups were also involved in the project through interviews and property owner surveys. Those stakeholders included:

 Local residents

 Local property and business owners

 Nanuet School District

 Shops at Nanuet

 Nanuet Post Office

 Nanuet Civic Association

 Nanuet Chamber of Commerce

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 25 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

 Transport of Rockland (Rockland County Public Transportation)

 Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA)

 New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT)

As part of the stakeholder outreach, local property and business owners were identified, with an emphasis on owners who hold multiple properties or key parcels within the immediate study area.h Wit assistance from the Town of Clarkstown, these owners were contacted to introduce them to the project and request to participate in a survey with interview questions in advance of the first public meeting. This introduction also served the dual function of raising initial awareness of the upcoming public meetings and soliciting their attendance. A total of ten interviews were conducted. Some of the main takeaways and common themes discerned from these interviews are as follows:

 Stakeholders expressed interest in changing zoning in order to allow the private sector to bring in development.

 Promote mixed‐use development consisting of apartments, condominiums, townhouses, along with businesses and options to shop and eat after work.

 Access and increased connectivity to the Nanuet Train Station and to the Shops at Nanuet.

 Make downtown Nanuet more aesthetically attractive with additional landscaping elements, greenspace and pedestrian amenities.

3.4 Additional Review & Public Communication Opportunities

In addition to the stakeholder groups and public meetings, additional input was available throughout the entire planning process via the following methods:

Town Website

During the course of the project, the Town of Clarkstown Planning Department provided copies of all project materials on a dedicated page of the town website, document the planning process and public input. Provided materials include meeting announcements, meeting notes, copies of presentation materials, survey results and copies of draft deliverables. Additionally, the project team received public comment through email.

Tri-State Transportation Campaign: Pedestrian & Bicycling Safety in the Town of Clarkstown – Results from September 2016 Walking Audit of Nanuet Hamlet

Stemming from the ongoing Nanuet TOD planning and design efforts, the Tri‐State Transportation Campaign (TSTC) recently performed an audit to examine bicycle and pedestrian conditions in the area near the Nanuet Train Station and Main Street within the Hamlet Center. The Tri‐State Transportation Campaign is an advocacy group dedicated to reducing automobile dependency in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. On September 16, 2016 members of the Steering Committee, public officials, project staff, and members of the public joined TSTC staff in a walking audit throughout Nanuet that was open to the public. In their audit, TSTC focused on two primary corridors; Prospect Street and Main Street. Although the TSTC individually analyzed segments of these primary thoroughfares, certain

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 26 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan overarching themes are evident throughout the extents of both streets within the Hamlet Center. For the most part, bicycle and pedestrian accommodation and infrastructure can be described as limited and inconsistent, with the design of these thoroughfares favoring automobile usage. TSTC made multiple recommendations in their audit, including the need for clearly marked crosswalks, street and landscape improvements, bike lanes, thematic wayfinding signage and ADA accommodation, especially in those locations adjacent to the Nanuet Train Station. Through the development of a vibrant TOD neighborhood centered around the Nanuet Train Station, the Nanuet TOD Plan and the ongoing planning process gives special attention and consideration to these important programmatic elements, as identified by the TSTC and general public. Incorporation of these elements in the TOD planning and design process will ensure that Downtown Nanuet is a vibrant community open and accessible to residents and business owners alike.

Additional Government Reviews / Public Opportunities

In addition to the public meetings listed above, additional opportunities for public review and comment will be available during forthcoming public workshops and Town Board hearings as the Town officially considers proposed zoning regulatory changes for adoption and performs SEQRA review.

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 27 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

4.0 TOD 101

Transit Oriented Development (TOD) is an emerging and growing trend in development in the United States. The Center for Transit Oriented Development projects that by 2025 near half of all households (4.9 million out of 8.7 million) in the New York City region will be located within one‐half mile of a transit station and that demand for TOD will outpace supply9.

4.1 What is TOD?

Broadly stated, TOD is a development pattern intended to take advantage of high levels of accessibility to fixed guideway transit systems. Due to the nature of fixed guideway transit, TOD typically implies compact, walkable development with a mix of uses and high levels of multimodal accessibility. The benefits of successful TODs include increased transit ridership and more walking and cycling, reduced reliance on private auto use, lower household transportation costs, greater access to jobs, better quality of life and reduced energy consumption.

Classic TOD concept. (source: Calthorpe Associates) Generally speaking, TOD refers to an area between a one‐ quarter mile and a one‐half mile radius from a transit station. The scale and character of TOD can vary by the specific mode and frequency of transit service, surrounding character (urban or suburban), local and regional markets and other factors.

4.2 TOD Guidelines

There are a number of TOD guidelines published for communities and regions that prescribe characteristics or criteria such as density, intensity and land use mix. Guidelines are typically stratified into typologies for different station areas to account for differences in context (a downtown urban core versus a suburban location, for example).

Several published TOD guidelines were reviewed to get insight into how other communities and regions address TOD from a development standpoint. A summary of findings for station area typologies most similar to the Hamlet of Nanuet is identified in Table 4. Most of the typologies are not mode‐specific, instead of more generally describing premium or rail transit service, but all of them describe a primarily residential, neighborhood‐oriented setting.

The following table summarizes TOD guidelines observed from other agencies. This type of comparison is valuable when determining the scale and size of a particular TOD project and can be used to determine potential impacts. A summary of three key observations follows Table 6.

9 “Hidden in Plain Sight: Capturing the Demand for Housing Near Transit,” Center for Transit Oriented Development, 2004.

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 28 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Table 6: Summary of TOD Guidelines

Building Average Density Average Intensity Height Agency TOD Type Description Net Gross Net Gross Land Use Mix Other Massachusetts Town & Village Commuter rail station areas in mixed‐use NA 26.2 du/ac NA 21.8 NA 76% Bay town centers, business districts, or villages, emp/ac population; Transportation ranging from outlying Boston neighborhoods 24% Authority to suburban downtowns and small village employment (MBTA)1 centers. Florida Neighborhood Neighborhood Centers are dominated by 12‐15 9‐12 du/ac 1.0‐1.5 15‐20 3 stories 75% Total station Department of Center residential uses and are served by some type du/ac FAR jobs/acre residential/25% area Transportation Commuter Rail of premium transit. Non‐residential uses in non‐residential population (FDOT)2 them are limited to local‐serving retail and and services. employment are 2,000‐ 3,000 each. Reconnecting Transit Transit neighborhoods are primarily 25‐50 1.0 FAR NA Primarily Total station America and Neighborhood residential areas that are served by rail du/ac residential with area dwelling the Center for service or high‐frequency bus lines that some units 2,000‐ Transit‐ connect at one location. Densities are low to supporting 5,000. Oriented moderate and economic activity is not retail. Development3 concentrated around stations, which may be Employment is located at the edge of two distinct market‐based. neighborhoods. Metropolitan Neighborhood Neighborhood stations are located in 15‐50 1.0‐5.0 2‐8 Multi‐family Atlanta Rapid primarily residential districts, and their du/ac FAR stories residential Transit principal transportation function is to help the and/or Authority people who live nearby get to work, school, neighborhood (MARTA)4 shopping, entertainment, medical services, scale mixed‐use and other destinations accessible through the with retail, transit network. The immediate station area is restaurant, and appropriate for higher‐density housing or service‐ neighborhood‐scale mixed‐use development. oriented offices. [1] "Growing Station Areas: The Variety and Potential of Transit Oriented Development in Metro Boston", Metropolitan Area Planning Council, 2012 [2] "Florida TOD Guidebook", Florida Department of Transportation, 2012 [3] "TOD 202: Station Area Planning", Reconnecting America, [4] "Transit Oriented Development Guidelines", MARTA, 2010

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 29 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

4.2.1 Minimum net density:

Net density is defined as the total number of dwelling units divided by the total amount of residential land, exclusive of other land uses, in the TOD area. Most of the guidelines prescribe net density ranges, although some also prescribe gross density ranges (which is the total number of dwelling units divided by the total amount of all land in the TOD area). The minimum net density falls within the range of 12 to 25 dwelling units per acre. This translates approximately into development types ranging from two‐story townhomes to low‐rise (up to three stories) apartments, depending on unit size, parking, yard area, amenities, etc. The prescribed maximum net density varies significantly, from a low of 15 dwelling units per acre to a high of 50 dwelling units per acre.

4.2.2 Appropriate floor area ratio (FAR):

FAR is defined as the ratio of a building's total floor area (zoning floor area) to the size of the piece of land upon which it is built. FAR is traditionally used by municipalities as a mechanism in zoning codes to control the density of development on any given parcel. Conversely,R FA plays a key role in private development. Since FAR limits the amount of allowable development (building size) on a given parcel, lower FAR’s may act as a deterrent and limit a parcels attractiveness to private development. As a result, establishing an appropriate FAR that meets municipal, community, and private development needs is critical. Most guidance for TOD prescribes a minimum FAR of 1.0, in which the total amount of building area is equal to the total amount of land area. In theory, this could be a one‐story building that covers an entire lot. However, because of other site factors such as yard area, parking, setbacks, etc., actual building heights are in the two to four story range. The prescribed maximum FAR ranges from 1.5 to 4.0.

4.2.3 Land use mix:

All of the guidelines prescribe that a majority of the land use within a TOD area is residential. Some go a step further to prescribe the specific amount (75%) of residential land. The prescribed non‐residential uses include retail to support adjacent residential and transit passenger foot traffic and service‐oriented office uses.

4.3 Case Studies and Best Practices

In additional to prescriptive guidelines, it is also useful to get an on‐the‐ground perspective of TOD that has been implemented both within the region and nationally. A number of published reports on TOD case studies and best practices were reviewed for this study. Many of the case studies are not applicable because they are in a context much different than the Hamlet of Nanuet. However, a handful of case studies are applicable.

All of the case studies included here are served by commuter rail into a major employment center. Two of the case studies, Cranford Crossing in New Jersey and Georgetown TOD in Connecticut, are located in New York City bedroom communities. The other two case studies are located in exurban Boston (Concord Commons) and Chicago (Arlington Heights). Most of the stations are located in neighborhood/village settings, although one (Arlington Heights) is adjacent to a traditional downtown.

Additionally, all of the case studies reviewed feature a significant residential component, ranging from 20 to 1,500 units. Exact development data isn’t published, so it’s difficult to estimate net density. However, based on information about building heights, the densities appear to be in the same range as prescribed by the TOD guidelines cited above.

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 30 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Lastly, all of the case study developments include supporting retail, ranging from 22,000 square feet to 157,000 square feet. The Georgetown TOD in Connecticut also includes 300,000 square feet of commercial space, including office and retail uses. The Arlington Heights TOD includes a performing arts facility.

Table 7: Summary of TOD Case Studies

TOD Location Context Size Development Notable characteristics Characteristics

Cranford Cranford, Commuter rail station 50 condominiums Uses a Special Crossing1 NJ in a New York City 22,000 of‐of retail Improvement District to bedroom community. 310 space public fund streetscape parking garage improvements. Three to four‐story building heights Georgetown Redding, Former Brownfield 55 acres 416 housing units TOD CT site in a New York 300,000 of City bedroom commercial space community. Concord Concord, Commuter rail station 2.3 acres 20 rental Uses shared parking to Crossing MA in a suburban Boston apartments reduce the total number village. Serves Boston Office/retail mixed of spaces. commuter as well as use historic downtown 180‐seat restaurant tourism. 126 parking spaces Downtown Arlington Suburban Chicago 1,500 residential Relocated station and Arlington Heights, IL commuter rail station units platform to be closer to Heights adjacent to a 157,000 of retail downtown. traditional Performing arts Public investment of $27 downtown. facility million (including transit Four to six‐story agency, DOT and local TIF building heights funds) has leveraged the private investment of $225 million. [1] "At the Heart of Your Community A Citizen’s Guide to Transit‐Oriented Development", New Jersey Future, 2011 [2] "Transit‐Oriented Development (TOD) Success Stories", New Haven‐Hartford‐Springfield Rail Program "Growing With the Flow: How Connecticut Communities can Take Advantage of TOD," Conference on Transit Oriented Development, Central Connecticut State University, 2007

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 31 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

4.4 Regional Trends in TOD

Over the next 3 years, 1.5 million Americans will turn 65 – a rate that is quadruple the rate of a decade prior. By the year 2029, all of the “baby boomers” will be 65 or over and more than 20 percent of the total U.S. population will comprise people overe the ag of 65.10 The United States also has a population of approximately 80 million people born between the years 1982 and 2000 – an age cohort commonly known as the “Millennials.”11 The changing housing and lifestyle preferences of these generational cohorts are driving a market shift toward living scenarios where residents are surrounded by a mix of uses in a pedestrian‐friendly environment that is proximate to numerous transportation options.

In the Hudson Valley region, trends published by the United States Census Bureau (U.S. Census) and informed by the American Community Survey (ACS) show that of survey responders who changed residences between the year 2000 and 2013, only about 20 percent moved to another location within the Hudson Valley. During this time period in Rockland County, about 83 percent of people migrated to a location outside the region while only about 17 percent of movers stayed within the region. Those from the region who moved away tended to be younger, at the beginning of their careers and without children.12 Regional statistics detailing exactly why people chose to move during these years are not available; however, on a national level, the U.S. Census determined that close to 50 percent of everyone who moved in 2013 chose to relocate for housing‐related reasons.13 The national trends indicate that people are moving to urbanized areas to find better, more desirable and affordable housing options. These motivations likely reflect motivations of movers leaving the Hudson Valley as well.

As noted in Urban Action Agenda’s 2015 report Hudson Valley Pattern for Progress, the Hudson Valley region does not have a single urban center that “acts as the region’s heart, but instead consists of a constellation of urban centers along the Hudson River [and within] transportation corridors” such as railroad corridors. While this may be true based on spatial patterns, regional commuting trends and patterns would cite New York City as the regional engine of growth and major trip generator and trip attractor. Because commuting patterns and housing preferences are inextricably linked, it is important to analyze regional commuting trends to assess the type of housing, and development, which may be in demand.

The following figure depicts the historic trend of travel across the Hudson River (bi‐directional) to and from Manhattan, from 1980 to 2014 from data provided by the Port Authority of New York/New Jersey. As observed, the mode share of public transportation has been continuously growing while the share of automobile commuters has remained relatively stagnant for over 30 years. This has direct implications for the demand for housing – if people continue to increase their mode share utilization of public transit, then demand for TOD should increase. This should hold true for all travel into Manhattan, including commuters from the Hamlet of Nanuet.

10 US Census Bureau https://www.census.gov/prod/2014pubs/p25‐1141.pdf

11 US Census Bureau: Millennials Outnumber Baby Boomers and Are Far More Diverse http://www.census.gov/newsroom/press‐releases/2015/cb15‐113.html

12 Urban Action Agenda: Hudson Valley Pattern for Progress: September 2015 http://www.pattern‐for‐progress.org/wp‐content/uploads/2015/09/Population‐brief‐9‐22‐15‐final.pdf

13 Ihrke, David, U.S. Census Bureau. “Reasons for Moving: 2012 to 2013.” June 2014

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 32 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Source – Port Authority of New York & New Jersey; Trans‐Hudson Commuting Capacity Study Figure 15: Historic Trends in Trans‐Hudson Travel by Mode

The following graphically represent the modal choice of commuters into Manhattan, based on origin. These figures show that Rockland County residents commute into Manhattan mostly by car and bus but enclaves of commuters do travel by rail. Based on Figure 3 approximately 10 percent of commuters from Rockland County travel to Manhattan by rail.

Source – Port Authority of New York & New Jersey; Trans‐Hudson Commuting Capacity Study Figure 16: Mode Split by Origin for Trans‐Hudson Commuters to Manhattan

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 33 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

The distribution of passengers modal split and why certain counties have higher shares of rail commuters than others may be due to accessibility of rail services and frequency, duration of trip, required transfers of one‐seat rides, availability of train station parking and many other factors. Explanation of these distributions is beyond the scope of this memorandum, but the important message is that demand for TOD is directly linked to commuting patterns and Rockland County has a presence among Manhattan‐bound commuters. Rockland County is currently underserved by rail, but encouraging TOD along the Pascack Valley Line supports potential improvements to service frequency, infrastructure improvements, and may help to justify the return on investments.

Source – Port Authority of New York & New Jersey; Trans‐Hudson Commuting Capacity Study; Appendix A: Interstate Bus Network – Operational and Service Strategies Figure 17: Mode Share of Rail by Origin for Trans‐Hudson Commuters to Manhattan

Commuting trends and housing are inextricably linked. Many transportation corridor communities lack the facilities, amenities or housing stock to accommodate the national and regional shifts in housing preferences not only for the Millenials but also for those who are 65 and over. It has been widely recognized in contemporary urban planning and economic development literature that there is a tremendous renewed interest in walkable, transit‐oriented and urban style living accommodations for both young adults and senior citizens.

Housing preference changes amongst varying age cohorts are supported by national surveys such as those conducted by real estate advisors Robert Charles Lessor Company (RCLCO). Of those who identified as “baby boomers”, 83 percent ranked walking, 67 percent ranked nearby shopping, and 51 percent ranked bicycling as top priorities for choosing housing.14 A poll by AARP in 2010 of people age 45 and older found nearby transit stops, grocery stores,

14 RCLCO, Best Practices Report, Seniors Housing Innovative Intergenerational Projects,

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 34 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

parks, pharmacies and drug stores particularly important for deciding upon housing.15 A RCLCO survey also stated a trend that aging seniors often prefer intergeneration housing projects, or age‐restricted housing projects closely integrated into an intergenerational walkable neighborhood.16

Therefore, development proposals that would create walkable, lively and active neighborhoods upon existing urban infill may find a viable residential market by encompassing senior citizens in the future. Del Webb, one of the most prominent developers of retirement communities in the United States conducted a survey of “baby boomers” and found that approximately 28 percent of boomers surveyed anticipated that their housing needs would change in the next five years and of those, 60 percent planned to downsize in their next home purchase.17 A survey in the Sacramento California region showed almost two‐thirds of survey respondents in the Baby Boomer cohort wanted their next home to be an attached townhouse, condominium or small home.18

Generation Y and Millennials also indicate an inclination toward urban living. A 2013 RCLCO survey of those identifying as part of Generation Y indicated approximately 40 percent of those surveyed would prefer to live in an urban environment. A 2013 Urban Land Institute (ULI) survey of those identifying as Millennials showed that close to 40 percent also prefer urban style living.19, 20

These shifts are not only abstract housing preferences amongst age cohorts but also have come to fruition on a national level. The ACS indicates that from 2010 to 2013, the population of 20‐ to 29‐year‐olds in ‘core counties’ rose by 407,400, or 3.2 percent. In addition, between 2007 and 2011, the number of renter households increased by 3.4 million and 3 million household units shifted from owner‐occupied to rental housing stock.21 Almost simultaneously, the rate of homeownership in the U.S. has steadily declined since 2006 and is now reaching a 50 year low, according to the U.S. Census.22 Survey data indicates a market for urban‐style, rental living accommodations in combination with other design and transit elements that contribute to desirable living conditions.

March 5, 2013 http://www.rclco.com/advisory‐seniors‐housing‐innovativeintergenerational‐projects

15 AARP, Where ages 45+ want to live, November, 2010, http://assets.aarp.org/rgcenter/general/home‐community‐services‐10.pdf

16 RCLCO, Best Practices Report, Seniors Housing Innovative Intergenerational Projects, March 5, 2013 http://www.rclco.com/advisory‐seniors‐housing‐innovativeintergenerational‐ projects

17 Del Webb Baby Boomer Survey 2015. https://delwebbboomersurvey.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/key‐findings‐fact‐sheet.pdf

18 RCLCO, Demographic Trends Support Robust Multifamily Demand, August 8, 2013, http://www.rclco.com/advisory‐demographic‐trends‐support‐robust‐multifamily‐demand

19 RCLCO, The Impact of Gen Y on Housing: The Market and Demographic Perspective,

July 23, 2013, http://www.rclco.com/presentations‐housing‐demand

20 Urban Land Institute, America in 2013: Key Findings on Housing, Community,

Transportation, and the Generations, March 2013, http://uli.org/wp‐content/uploads/ULIDocuments/America‐in‐2013‐Compendium_web.pdf

21 America’s Rental Housing: Evolving Markets and Needs, Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University., 2013. http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/jchs.harvard.edu/files/jchs_americas_rental_housing_2013_1_0.pdf

22 U.S Census, Quarterly Homeownership Rates and Seasonally Adjusted Homeownership Rates for the United States: 1995‐2016 http://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/files/currenthvspress.pdf

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 35 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

In the past, employers located commercial office campuses immediately in and around regional highways to facilitate access for their employees. Workers living in low‐density suburbs without direct access to public transit, commute either directly to work, or to transportation hubs using private vehicles creating peak hour congestion and seas of at‐ grade parking in/around train stations.

Some contend that the introduction of autonomous cars onto American roads is likely to further exacerbate congestion due to induced demand for road space.23 When accounting for these factors, combined with the volatility of fuel prices and increasing real estate costs, it is easy to understand why regional policy and planning organizations want to reassess whether current residential and commercial land use patterns can meet anticipated demand. Employers seeking talent from around the globe and remote working arrangements are the norms rather than the exception. As noted above, preferences are changing toward more efficient and geographically focused living.

Therefore, to not only sustain economic viability and retain residents, but also to accommodate changing housing preferences, communities in the Hudson Valley region should focus on creating vibrant town centers, walkable neighborhoods, and access to high‐quality public spaces, residential rental opportunities, and competitive transportation alternatives. This can be accomplished by encouraging growth and TOD in the village, town, and urban centers.

In 2007, the Regional Planning Association (RPA) completed the Rockland County Tappan Zee Corridor Transit‐Oriented Development Study of the Route 59 and I‐287 Tappan Zee Bridge corridors, which featured TOD concepts. One of the “workshop sites” featured in the study was the Hamlet of Nanuet due to suburban development opportunities and challenges including the relationship between traditional “main streets” in downtown Nanuet, commercial strip development along Route 59 and the “edge city” collection of big box retail and hotels, surrounded by large swaths of surface parking at the Nanuet Mall.24 The study suggested two alternatives: create a future commuter rail stop east of the Route 59/Thruway overpass, which would locate a train station closer to the concentration of higher density housing on the north side of the Thruway or a possible transfer to the Pascack Valley Line. The disadvantages of this proposal were that the location was more isolated from a future potential pedestrian activity because arterial roadways and parking lots for big box retail would have made the environment hostile to the pedestrian. The other alternative for a future train station was south of the Route 59/Thruway overpass on the south side of the Thruway east of the park‐and‐ride off Forman Drive and Route 59. This alternative was closer to the higher density residential areas south of the Thruway accessed from Old Turnpike Road.

The study explored an incremental approach to accommodating future parking needs in the Hamlet of Nanuet for train station commuters and shoppers. Instead of future development projects creating a single large parking structure in the Hamlet of Nanuet, the findings proposed that future parking needs for all uses would be better accommodated if each future development project was required to provide some shared and commuter parking. Such an initiative would foster a walkable environment throughout the area because it would avoid vast expanses of parking lots and the traffic bottlenecks that so often come in conjunction with parking facilities with minimal access points. Finally, the study suggested that in order to facilitate this community vision derived from these workshops, the Hamlet of Nanuet would need to create a new mixed‐use overlay district, write new shared‐parking requirements, and implement design guidelines to promote a pedestrian friendly environment.

23 Barnard, Michael 2016: “Autonomous Cars Likely to Increase Congestion” https://cleantechnica.com/2016/01/17/autonomous‐cars‐likely‐increase/

24 TZ Corridor Transit Oriented Development Study. 2007 p. 16 http://www.rpa.org/pdf/RPATZCorridorFinal.pdf

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 36 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

In 1999, the State of New Jersey launched the Transit Village Initiative creating a “transit village” designation to encourage growth and revitalization in areas where infrastructure and public transit already exist. The Transit Village Initiative operates under the assumption that adding residential housing options, transit‐supportive parking, place making, pedestrian emphasis and a high‐quality walking and biking environment within walking distance of a transit facility reduces traffic congestion, improves air quality and revitalizes downtown.25 Since 2016, the program has successfully added 32 municipalities each year to its list of designated Transit Villages.

Source: njmda.org Figure 18: Atlantic Street Park, Main Street Hackensack

To attain designation, a municipality must meet “transit village” criteria, which includes having a village district with a half‐mile radius around the transit station and significant planning and visioning work setting the stage for multiple TOD projects within the area. Along the Pascack Valley Line, the city of Hackensack recently was designated by the New Jersey Department of Transportation as the State’s 31st “transit village”. Their application focused on reimaging the downtown and creating an “18‐hour city” that encourages mixed‐use development, walkability, and a sustainable urban growth pattern.26 By demonstrating a commitment to good planning through the adoption of zoning ordinances and policies that encourage accessibility to multiple mass transit options, as well as biking and walking, Hackensack can access additional grant and funding opportunities. Figure 4 highlights the newly redeveloped Atlantic Street Park and the mixed‐use Metro Meridia project located at 94 State Street in the background.

Communities throughout the Hudson Valley region have also embraced transit‐oriented development projects with the goal of providing more affordable housing choices, spurring downtown revitalization, increasing multi‐modal transportation alternatives and reducing automobile dependence. TOD is a community development tool and a public realm design enhancement that often includes developing a mixture of housing, office space, retail and other amenities integrated into a walkable neighborhood located within a half mile of quality public transportation.27

25 State of New Jersey Department of Transportation, Transit Village Initiative Overview. Accessed December 2016 http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/community/village/index.shtml

26 David Troast, Hackensack City Manager. http://www.nj.com/bergen/index.ssf/2015/04/long‐anticipated_downtown_redevelopment_takes_shap.html 27 National Leage of Cities Sustainable Cities Institute: Guide for TOD: http://www.sustainablecitiesinstitute.org/topics/land‐use‐and‐planning/transit‐oriented‐development‐ (tod)/guide‐for‐tod

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 37 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

The Smart Growth Cabinet suggests that a true transit‐oriented plan is built with a mixed‐use core of about a quarter to a half‐mile in size (sometimes considered a traditional village scale), often incorporating the walkable, bike‐able and ‘human‐scale’ design elements of New Urbanism where buildings ared constructe close to the street on small lots with parking in back. In theory, residents of places that have been developed with access to transit as a priority need not be completely dependent on their cars. TOD is a term used in walkable development plans for the last several decades but development around transit hubs is not a radical concept. The truth is that many villages, towns, and cities grew around transit from their inception – whether that was a city growing from a shipping and trade waterway like New York City, or a village growing around a train station, like many communities in the Hudson Valley.

Today, those living in the region are not newcomers to the concept of TOD. Many communities are looking to their transit stations as potential catalysts to spur investment, revitalize their downtown corridors and “keep empty‐nesters and younger members of the workforce commuting to NYC” in these downtowns.28 Hamlets like the Hamlet of Nanuet seeking to implement innovative land use and best practices for developing TOD can find guidance in methodologies and lessons learned within communities throughout the region.

The White Plains Metro‐North Railroad Station is an express stop station that offers one‐stop express trains to and from New York City. Therefore, it offers abundant potential redevelopment opportunities for increased residential development around the train station. White Plains was an early adopter of TOD principles with several apartment buildings built two decades ago within a short walking distance of the train platform.

In August 2015, the City of White Plains rezoned Westmoreland Avenue, which is approximately one half‐mile from the White Plains Metro‐North Railroad Station, from Light Industrial (LI) to Light Industrial Mixed Use (LI‐M). The new LI‐M District now permits multi‐family dwellings, hotels and extended hotel uses to maximum heights of six stories or 85 feet alongside light industry. In addition to adding vitally needed housing stock, a secondary benefit was the ability for developers to reclaim rare original architecture (previously razed in other parts of White Plains during urban renewal projects of the 1970’s), such as the Old Swackhamer Building seen, above and repurpose uses that meet current market demands.

Source: The Westchester View Figure 19: Old Swackhamer Building, 122 Westmoreland Avenue, White Plains, NY

28 Garbarini, Samantha, “Breaking Down Westchester’s Future Transit Oriented Development”, Westchester Magazine, http://www.westchestermagazine.com/914‐INC/Q2‐ 2015/Breaking‐Down‐Westchesters‐Future‐Transit‐Oriented‐Development/

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 38 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Additionally, the rezoning was an opportunity to bring in new private investment to Westmoreland Avenue. For example, Norden Lofts LLC converted an existing 48,000 square foot (SF) structure into a 56,424 SF transit‐oriented residential building.29 Today, the City of White Plains is currently preparing an evaluation of public transit use, development potential and the feasibility of a “transit zone” around the Metro‐North Railroad Station and regional bus station. The ongoing Downtown White Plains Transit District planning study is currently gathering public input for a t1,500‐foo study area around the train station.

The City of New Rochelle amended its zoning code and parking requirements to allow for heights, densities and parking requirements (maximum parking requirements at transit areas) consistent with TOD principles.30 Through this process, the City learned that economic development, downtown pedestrian circulation and transit connectivity, as well as accommodating a range of income levels currently residing in the “TOD zone,” were important to a robust TOD plan.31 Through a public/private partnership, the City of New Rochelle and RDRXR (a private developer) created a zoning plan with “clusters” of TOD study areas forming a series of gateways in conjunction with a “complete streets plan” to facilitate pedestrian wayfinding and a more efficient transit‐oriented street layout. The land around the New Rochelle Metro‐North Railroad station and transit hub were split into six “downtown overlay zone” districts based on a proposed development program and walking distance/travel time on foot – to the train station. Central districts were proposed closer to the train station to encourage higher density office, restaurant, and residential uses.

As the distance from the train station increases, the proposed development intensity is proposed to decrease. For example, the “Downtown Core District DO‐1” and “Downtown District DO‐2” are both within a 5‐minute walk of the train station while the farther “North of Lincoln District DO‐6” district is within a 15‐minute walk of the train station.32 Each overlay zone guides development to meet design standards, offer community benefits and coalesce with an overall transit‐oriented master plan. In return, as long as developers meet guidelines established in the master planning process, projects would only have to provide minimal traffic impact studies to gain City approval rather than lengthy full state environmental quality review (SEQRA) process. In 2016, the area surrounding the train station is poised for transit‐oriented redevelopment due to conditions created by the downtown overlay zones.

In 2003, the City of Yonkers carefully carried out urban design enhancements such as the daylighting of the Saw Mill River in combination with multi‐family mixed‐use development on the Hudson riverfront. These efforts created a successful TOD around the Yonkers Metro‐North Railroad station. The City adopted a master plan and a “Master Plan Zone” that steered development by creating as‐of‐right status for developments that conformed to specific design standards outlined in the ‘Master Plan Zone’ zoning text; this reduced parking requirements by 50 percent, is economically appealing to developers and has numerous community benefits.33 The zone facilitated the development of Hudson Park along the Yonkers waterfront, which included 780 rental studio‐, one‐, two‐, and three‐bedroom apartments, with 15,500 square feet of commercial space and a pedestrian‐only river‐walk.

In 2016, South Norwalk, Connecticut sought to revitalize the area centered on the South Norwalk Metro‐North Railroad Station and released a plan to encourage contextual infill development around the station area and create “complete, compact neighborhoods” that would encourage new residential and commercial growth. A South Norwalk

29 Woyton, Michael, “White Plains Oks Rezoning for Transit Oriented Development, 2016. Patch.com/new‐york/whiteplains/white‐plains‐oks‐rezoning‐transit‐oriented‐development 30 Transit Oriented Development Smart Growth Study, New Rochelle, NY. January 2014. http://www.sustainablenyct.org/docs/New%20Rochelle%20FinalReport1.8.14.pdf

31 Transit Oriented Development Smart Growth Study, New Rochelle, NY. January 2014. http://www.sustainablenyct.org/docs/New%20Rochelle%20FinalReport1.8.14.pdf

32 RDXR At New Rochelle Traffic Study, 2015, p. 50

33 Pace Law School Land Use Law Center: TOD Developments, Hudson Park, Yonkers NY, https://todline.blogs.pace.edu/tod‐developments/

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 39 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Railroad Station Area TOD Strategy Report released in 2011 established goals, objectives, and implementation strategies, which were expanded upon in the South Norwalk TOD Redevelopment Plan, released in January 2016.34 The overall goal of the TOD efforts in Norwalk was to maintain and bolster the economic viability of the downtown core by attracting workers and residents. This initiative established a TOD Study Area that would be called a “TOD‐ Core” zone. The plan proposed to replace existing zoning districts with new TOD‐focused guidelines, encourage TOD principals and identify future development corridors to connect developments in the TOD area.

As noted above, many villages and communities throughout the region relied on transit since their inception and developed due to their proximity to rail. Now, after half a century of vehicular‐oriented land use development patterns (often referred to as Sprawl), many Hudson Valley municipalities are looking inward toward their central transit and rail corridors and partnering with private entities to realize development goals as they plan for the future of their communities. For example in 2016, private developer GDC opened the Harbor Square development immediately adjacent to the Ossining Metro‐North station in the Village of Ossining. The development contains 188‐ unit luxury apartments and a 5,000 square foot destination waterfront restaurant. In approving the project, the Village of Ossining aimed to attract newcomers and bring visitors from other communities to shop, dine and enjoy Ossining.

Similarly, the Comprehensive Plan for the Village of Harrison identified a similar community goal and recognized an opportunity for a mixed use TOD near the train station. In 2015, the MTA entered into a Joint Development Agreement for the first Metro‐North initiated TOD, partnering with yAvalon Ba Communities to create 143 residential units, 27,000 SF of retail and pedestrian plazas on a 3.28‐acre site adjacent to the station, on the south side of the tracks. The proposed development, created by a public‐private partnership between the MTA, the Village of Harrison and Avalon Bay, is aimed to enliven the Village of Harrison with stores and a 24‐hour community of residents

In 2013, the Village of Port Chester created a master plan and a zoning text rewrite, which has incentivized mixed use and TOD and revitalized the area along the railroad tracks. The Village code offers incentives in the form of density bonuses for height, floor area, or the number of dwelling units in exchange for a public benefit including the provision of donations toward a fund to create publicly accessible open space or a downtown parking garage.35 These changes have facilitated the development of buildings like a proposed 79‐unit mixed use building on Westchester Avenue two blocks from the Metro‐North Station and an approved 50‐unit rental project on North Pearl Street.36

In February 2016, the Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board unanimously approved the phase one site plan for the redevelopment of the 85‐acre former General Motors (GM) plant – a riverfront property one‐half mile north of the Tarrytown Metro‐North Railroad station. The project proposes approximately 1,000 new residential units, 135,000 square feet of retail space, 30,000 square feet of office space and 16 acres of parkland.37 The development has been incorporated into the 2016 Tarrytown Station Area Study exploring pedestrian connectivity and way‐finding, place‐ making, and development opportunities and constraints immediately around the Tarrytown Metro‐North Railroad

34 South Norwalk TOD Redevelopment Plan, January 2016. http://norwalkct.org/DocumentCenter/View/9120

35 Donelson, Dave, “Will Gritty Port Chester Capitalize on Its Various Assets?” Westchester Magazine. http://www.westchestermagazine.com/914‐INC/Q2‐2015/Port‐Chester‐ Development‐Projects/

36 Wilson, Reid. “Five‐Story, 79‐Unit Mixed‐Use Building Proposed at 59 Westchester Avenue, Port Chester, NY YIMBY. December 2015 http://newyorkyimby.com/2015/12/five‐story‐ 79‐unit‐mixed‐use‐building‐proposed‐at‐59‐westchester‐avenue‐port‐chester.html

37 What’s Happening On the Hudson, Edge‐On‐Hudson. Accessed December 2016. http://www.edgeonhudson.com/former‐gm‐property‐on‐hudson‐river‐gets‐new‐life/

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 40 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Station in conjunction with the New New York Bridge (NNYB) and Lower Hudson Transit Link regional projects.38 Other similarly scaled municipalities that have initiated TOD station area studies include Villages of Mamaroneck and the City of Rye.

4.5 Local Trends in TOD

When examining opportunities for TOD in a community, it is instructive to examine local peers so standards and planning concepts are as informed and harmonious as possible. For this study, the Hamlet of Nanuet’s peers are neighboring municipalities that have engaged or are actively engaging in TOD activities within approximately 10 miles from Nanuet. What follows summarizes the local trends observed in the bulk and zoning regulations of neighboring towns.

Table 8 shows important building code limits based on zoning in the Hamlet of Nanuet’s peer towns. The most important aspects of this table are building heights and units per acre for condos and apartment buildings and minimum lot areas for single family and semi‐attached homes because these zoning codes dictate what kinds of dwelling units could be built around the Hamlet of Nanuet’s train station. In terms of TOD market competition for new residents, minimum lot sizes and units per acre will impact a municipality’s competitiveness; greater dwelling unit density and smaller minimum lot sizes will make projects more attractive to developers, which would induce the creation of housing close to a transit hub; these factors may also make dwelling units more affordable for renters and buyers, which would induce people to move into an area.

Building height requirements impact the competitiveness of a community in terms of retaining existing residents and attracting new residents to places that can retain their character and scale of livability; existing and potential residents may not want buildings that are too high if they aret ou of scale with the surroundings, even if such projects may be more attractive to developers.

As observed below, the average building height of all zoning codes for these seven communities is 42 feet, the average density is 26 units per acre and the average minimum lot area is 35,057 square feet. However, these figures include multifamily housing, high‐rise units, apartments, single‐family detached and semi‐attached units. Additionally, the minimum parking requirements vary from two and a half spots per dwelling unit to zero spots, depending on the municipality and its zoning area. Suffern does not list explicit minimumg parkin requirements, perhaps due to its Transit Development District zone, which is the only community of the eight (including the Hamlet of Nanuet) with a proper TOD zoning district.

38 Tarrytown, Connected. A Framework for the Station Area & Waterfront, October 2016. http://www.tarrytownconnected.com/uploads/5/9/1/2/59125941/tarrytown‐connected‐final_with_appendices.pdf

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 41 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Table 8: Zoning, Bulk, and Parking Regulations of Neighboring Towns

Units / Building Minimum Parking Town Zoning Code Acre Height Min. lot area (SF) Requirements Spring Valley, NY R‐4 (multifamily) 68.0* 80 ft 20,000 2 spots / DU R‐5 (multifamily) 50.0* 40 ft 40,000 2 spots / DU RSH (1 family semi‐attached) 6.2 35 ft 7,000 2 spots / DU PRD (multifamily dwellings) 30* 40 ft 20,000 2 spots / DU Pearl River, NY R‐22 (single family detached) 1.9 30 ft 22,500 2 spots / DU R‐15 (single family detached) 5 30 ft 15,000 2 spots / DU MFR (multifamily residence) 26.6* 25 ft 40,000 1.5 / 1 br; 2 spots / 2 br Ridgewood NJ R‐4 (Garden apartment 20 30 ft 44,000 residence dist.) 1.8 spots/ DU R‐5 (multifamily residence 14.5 30 ft 44,000 district) 1.5‐2 spots / DU R‐7 (multifamily residence 22.11 35 ft 44,000 district) 1.5‐2 spots / DU Park Ridge NJ R‐10 4.4 32 ft 10,000 2 spots / DU R‐GA‐1 58* 35 ft 87,120 1.5 spots / DU + 1 for every 6 DU's for visitors R‐GA‐2 58* 35 ft 217,800 1.5 spots / DU + 1 for every 6 DU's for visitors Nyack, NY MFR‐1 14 40 ft 20,000 0‐2 / DU

MFR‐2 30 50 ft 20,000 0‐2 / DU MFR‐3 50 85 ft 40,000 0‐2 / DU DMU 50 40 ft ‐ 0‐1.7 / DU RMU 18 32 ft 7,500 0.85 ‐ 1.7 / DU Suffern, NY MR‐15 (Multiple dwellings) 15 35 ft 40,000 ‐ MR‐50 (Multiple dwellings, 50 70 ft 40,000 high‐rise) ‐ TDD (Multiple dwellings, high‐ 65 75 ft 40,000 rise) ‐ Tarrytown, NY M‐4 (Multifamily) 1.4 35 ft 20,000 (4k each add. DU) 2.5 spots / DU M‐3 (Multifamily) 1.8 35 ft 15,000 (3k each add. DU) 2.5 spots / DU M‐2 (Multifamily) 2.5 35 ft 10,000 (2.5k each add. DU) 2.5 spots / DU M‐1.5 (Multifamily) 3.6 35 ft 7,500 (1.5k each add. DU) 2.5 spots / DU M‐1 (Multifamily) 4.8 ‐ 5,000 (1k each add. DU) 2.5 spots / DU

* These numbers were not stated in zoning codes but were calculated based on dwelling units of 1,500 square feet, maximum building footprints and a maximum number of stories.

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 42 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

4.6 The Hamlet of Nanuet TOD Indicators

There are a few critical indicators that can be drawn for the Hamlet of Nanuet TOD:

 Residential as the primary focus: Without exception, every single guideline and case study features residential as the primary use.

 Densities in the 10 to 35 unit range: The net residential density should begin at ten (10) dwelling units per acre as a starting point. This is the equivalent of two‐story townhomes or low‐rise apartments. Maximum residential densities, as high as 40 dwelling units per acre, should be determined by market demand.

 Supporting retail is a key component: Virtually all of the guidelines and case studies include retail as an important supporting component. This is both to satisfy local demand, drive station‐related foot traffic and create a more robust activity center. Retail uses can include restaurants, shopping, and services.

 Other uses are optional: Beyond residential and supporting retail, there are no readily evident land use themes among the guidelines and case studies. Any other uses should be considered specialized and subject to the Hamlet of Nanuet’s unique circumstance.

These conclusions can be used as a framework to guide planning decisions as the Hamlet of Nanuet TOD moves forward. They should not be considered specific targets, but rather a starting point for more detailed, site‐specific planning and analysis.

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 43 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

5.0 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

After a review of existing conditions, a thorough assessment of physical opportunities and constraints was conducted with feedback and outreach with property and business owners in the area. Combined with the ongoing public participation process, this allowed the project team to effectively determine the most effective TOD zoning and design recommendations as they relate the scale and scope of transformation of the Greater Nanuet TOD area. This additionally included a preliminary examination of moving the Nanuet Train Station from its current location to an acceptable location further north and closer to the Shops at Nanuet regional shopping center and its parking lot. Metro‐North Railroad, as a stakeholder and member of the project’s steering committee, has occasionally been asked to consider such an approach. However, after review within the context of this study, constraints such as power lines, track geometry, property ownership and a new high level station platform, would make the relocation significantly cost prohibitive. Most importantly, moving the train station further away from the Nanuet downtown would be counteractive to the goals and objectives of the project as expressed by the community. As a result, relocation of the Nanuet Train Station was not further considered.

The following TOD plan components have been shaped by a well‐defined public vision and characterize planned configurations of form and character for the TOD area, shaped by public input and an appetite for public investment. Prior planning processes that have occurred in this area include in‐depth corridor land use studies and the comprehensive plan, which clearly defined the overall vision of the area residents as part of the participatory process to focus on the rejuvenation of the Main Street corridor to spur activity and economic development in downtown Nanuet.

The TOD Plan is not meant to be a stringent architectural design code, but rather a set of guidelines meant to foster vibrant and inclusive residential and economic development around the Nanuet Train Station. The Plan leverages the designs and concepts of successful examples of TOD throughout the New York City region, keeping in mind the local context of Nanuet. Ultimately, it is the hope that this plan and the Greater Nanuet TOD Area will serve as a model TOD neighborhood achieving sustainability and economic vitality.

5.1 Goals and Principles

The creation of the draft TOD Plan is rooted in the community developed vision that the “Nanuet Hamlet Center will enhance its small town feel and will be focused around the train station, main street, and communal green spaces. The center will focus on quality dining, local shopping, and housing for seniors and young professionals; and guided by specific design standards. The center will support a safe and accessible multimodal environment for bicycles and pedestrians”. Recommendations were developed using the vision statement as a backbone and refined to support the traits or qualities the residents, landowners, and businesses consider worthwhile for the Nanuet TOD Plan Area. Each recommendation element attempts to support the following goals verbalized by the community:

 Use train station as a catalyst for redevelopment of less desirable land uses into more desirable assets that enhance the community;

 Promote a mixed‐use community around a transit center that encourage alternative housing choices for young professionals and seniors;

 Encourage walkability;

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 44 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

 Ensure visual continuity through a signage and streetscape program;

 Improve parking management through more efficient use of existing parking infrastructure; and

 Support the creation of employment centers and other economic engines.

5.2 Zoning

Zoning is an integral part of the TOD Plan and Clarkstown’s ability to maximize the full potential of Nanuet’s train station. Because zoning dictates the specifications of what types of buildings and uses are permitted, an effective TOD plan is only as good as the zoning ordinances that dictate the area’s land use.

TOD Plan recommendations are restricted within the TOD Plan Boundary Area (see Figure 20) that was approved by the community. Under these existing conditions, current zoning ordinances inhibit TOD potential. Land uses within the TOD Plan Boundary Area are comprised predominantly of light industrial office (LIO) and hamlet commercial (HC), with the remainder of the area is comprised of regional shopping (RS), and multi‐family (MF‐1), and an inconsequential amount of residential (R‐10, R‐15), commercial (CS), and multi‐family (MF‐3). The TOD Plan Boundary Area is comprised of 72 parcels and is approximately 37.11 acres in size.

Within the TOD Plan Boundary Area, four areas with distinct features and development potential have been identified – TOD Area 1, TOD Area 2, TOD Area 3 and Hamlet Center (illustrated in Figure 21). Collectively, all four areas would aim to attract amenities that would support a diverse, multi‐generational community; with a more residentially focused area west of the rail line transitioning to a commercially mixed‐use core which then seamlessly blends into the existing hamlet center along Main Street. This publicly accepted four development zone concept is a foundational element, acting as the backbone for each of the following TOD Plan recommendations. As defined by the public for potential transit‐oriented development treatments, these four development areas are further defined as follows:

 TOD Area 1 – an area between Fisher Avenue and Babcock Avenue/Jerrys Avenue and to the west of TOD Area 2 and the railroad tracks that is currently zoned Light Industrial Office (LIO) and occupied by light industrial and commercial uses, as well as single‐family homes;

 TOD Area 2 – an area immediately west of the railroad tracks that is currently zoned Light Industrial Office (LIO) and Multi‐Family (MF‐1) and occupied by vacant parcels previously used for industrial activities;

 TOD Area 3 – an area immediately to the east of the railroad tracks and along Orchard Street that is currently zoned HC and occupied by light industrial and commercial uses; and

 Hamlet Center – an area along Main Street (Middletown Road) that is currently zoned Hamlet Commercial (HC) and occupied by mixed‐use “downtown” commercial uses with residential on the second and third floors

This section presents the recommended changes to existing zoning regulations within the TOD study area, including zoning, building placement and building height.

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 45 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Figure 20: Existing Zoning in the TOD Plan Boundary Area

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 46 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Nanuet Station

Figure 21: Conceptual Zoning Map

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 47 Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

5.2.1 Overall Program & TOD Design

The TOD Plan zoning recommendations are modeled after a concentric zoning design centered around the Nanuet Train Station. In this design, the Train Station serves as the focal point of the TOD neighborhood, with an emphasis on improving pedestrian flow between neighborhoods and residences on both sides of the railroad tracks.g Radiatin from the Nanuet Train Station are a series of higher density mixed‐use residential buildings up to four stories in height. With respect to the character of the existing Hamlet Center (HC) downtown portion of Nanuet, ground‐floor commercial within these residential buildings is most prevalent in the area immediately to the east of the railroad tracks, further enhancing the neighborhood’s vibrant character.

Conforming to neighborhood TOD design, ground‐floor commercial space is additionally prioritized in those buildings adjacent to the Nanuet Train Station and railroad tracks. Further to the west of the Train Station and Hamlet Center, the denser residential buildings gradually transition into attached townhomes and apartments with limited commercial development. This portion of the TOD area is meant to serve as a buffer between the denser developments closer to the Train Station and the existing single‐family residential neighborhoods along Prospect Street. The concentric design additionally seeks to maintain all existing green and public spaces while providing additional green space and pedestrian‐oriented areas, especially within and adjacent to the Hamlet Center.

Figure 22: Birds‐Eye View of Proposed Zoning Districts with Aerial Imagery 5.2.2 Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Area 1

Zoning Description

TOD Area 1 is located west of the rail line and directly adjacent to the residential neighborhood along Prospect Street, and runs predominately along Fisher Avenue. The TOD 1 zoning district serves as a buffer between the denser developments (TOD Areas 2 and 3) closer to the Nanuet Train Station and the existing single‐family residential neighborhoods to the west along Prospect Street. The area would consist of two‐ and three‐story walk‐up residential attached townhomes or condominiums. These types of residences could appeal to attract young families, couples and Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 49

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

‘empty nesters’. Although the area’s existing use as LIO functions as a buffer, a rezone to accommodate townhome style development would make better use of proximity to the Train Station and Hamlet Center, while providing increased flow and connectivity to those shops and amenities to the east of the railroad tracks.

TOD Area 1 would consist of attached townhomes of two and three stories, rising no higher than 35 feet. A total of 10 units per acre would be permitted. Of the three TOD Areas, TOD Area 1 is the most suburban in design, providing parking for each unit in the form of street parking and private garages. The front side of each townhome would also be set back from the street by 30 feet, which would be reserved for parking and bio‐swales. A setback of 35 feet would be required for property boundaries adjacent to residentially zoned district, and would be exclusively reserved for greenspace and buffering treatments. Sidewalks of 10 feet in width would align the public right‐of‐way, separated from a two‐way, 22‐foot lane street by grass and lined with trees. TOD Area 1 would provide a minimum of 15% green space.

The following figures offer visual examples of what type of design and style buildings that are planned for development in TOD Area 1.

Source: Normandy Village, Nanuet, NY; Town of Clarkstown Figure 23: TOD Area 1 Building Design Example 1

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 50

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Source: Coventry Park Townhomes, Morris Plains, NJ Figure 24: TOD Area 1 Building Design Example 2

The following illustration offers a conceptual rendering of TOD Area 1 development located along the northeast side of Fisher Avenue. The images perspective is looking north up Fisher Avenue with Prospect Street in the foreground.

Figure 25: TOD Area 1 Conceptual Rendering Intersection of Fisher Avenue and Prospect Street (perspective is looking northbound along Fisher Avenue)

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 51

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Area, Bulk and Density Requirements

The following table summarizes the proposed bulk and area requirements for TOD 1.

Table 9: Proposed Area, Bulk and Density Requirements for TOD Area 1

LOT SIZE (min.) Lot size 40,000 s.f. Lot width 150 ft min BUILDING HEIGHT (max.) Principal building 35 ft (3 stories) Accessory building 1 story SETBACK – PRIMARY BUILDING Front yard 30 ft min Side yard n/a Rear yard n/a Frontage build out min % n/a Buffer 35 ft buffer when adjacent to a residential zoned district SETBACK – ACCESSORY BUILDING Front yard 30 ft min Side yard 10 ft min Rear yard 10 ft min SETBACK – PARKING Front yard 10 ft min Side yard 0 ft min Rear yard 35 ft min LOT DENSITY AND GREENSPACE Greenspace % min 25% min Maximum floor area ratio .75 Maximum principal building(s) coverage 25.00% Maximum lot coverage 50% (including principal building(s) coverage) RESIDENTIAL DENSITY – Square feet of land area per unit 7,260 Units per acre 18 max Units per building 8 max Bedrooms per unit 1 – 2 bedrooms (maximum of 50% 2 bedroom units) Unit size 1,000 – 1,250 sf COMMERCIAL DENSITY Maximum size of 1st floor commercial n/a

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 52

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

The following illustration is conceptual site plan and cross section using proposed area, bulk, and density regulations for TOD Area 1 and a conceptual site plan and cross section for a streetscape program along Fisher Avenue.

Figure 26: TOD Area 1 Conceptual Site Plan and Cross‐Section for Proposed Area, Bulk, and Density Regulations and Streetscape Program

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 53

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

5.2.3 Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Area 2

Zoning Description

TOD Area 2 is located directly west of the rail line. The proposed new zoning in this area would consist of two‐ and three‐story residential apartments with one and two bedroom units. These types of residences could appeal to couples, young professionals, ‘empty nesters’ and senior citizens. As an area of increasing density given its adjacency to the Nanuet Train Station, TOD Area 2 would also include limited ground‐level commercial space (comprised of 10% of the floor building square foot footprint and frontage facing the rail line) with a program aimed at serving commuters. The purpose of TOD Area 2 is to act as a transitional zone between the single‐family residency and townhomes and the true mixed‐use focused TOD Area 3 east of the rail line.

TOD Area 2 would consist of apartment buildings of three stories and rising no higher than 35 feet or 3 stories. A total of 30 units per acre would be permitted as of right. However, developers may be eligible for a potential development bonus of 10 additional units per acre for LEED‐certified units and/or additional streetscape beautification efforts. The frontage of each buildings first two floors must be setback 5 feet from the lot line and the 3rd floor must be setback 15 feet from the properties lot line. This architectural nuance promotes a more open feeling at ground level. As compared with TOD Area 1, TOD Area 2 is architecturally more aligned with Main Streets urban character and focused on promoting a walkable community of alternative housing options. Sidewalks of 10 feet in width would align the public right‐of‐way, separated from a two‐way, 24‐foot lane street by grass and lined with trees. TOD Area 2 would also provide a minimum of 15% green space. Additionally, TOD Area 2 would be supportive of including public parks or other amenities.

The following figures offer visual examples of what type of design and style buildings that are planned for development in TOD Area 2.

Source: Swansea MetroLink Station ‐ Senior Apartments, Southwestern Illinois Development Authority (SWIDA)

Figure 27: TOD Area 2 Building Design Example 1

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 54

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Source: 86 Madison Avenue, Park Ridge, NJ, Cambridge Systematics Figure 28: TOD Area 2 Building Design Example 2

Figure 29: TOD Area 2 Conceptual Rendering of Prospect Street West of the Rail Line

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 55

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Area, Bulk and Density Requirements

The following table summarizes the proposed bulk and area requirements for TOD 2.

Table 10: Proposed Area, Bulk and Density Requirements for TOD Area 2

LOT SIZE (min.) Lot size 10,000 s.f. Lot width 60 ft min BUILDING HEIGHT (max.) Principal building 35 ft (3 stories, with 3rd floor setback at least 15 ft from lot line )* Accessory building 1 story SETBACK – PRIMARY BUILDING Front yard 5 ft min with 3rd floor is setback at least 15 ft from lot line Side yard 10 ft min Rear yard 30 ft min Frontage build out min % At least 50% at front setback Buffer n/a SETBACK – ACCESSORY BUILDING Front yard 5 ft min Side yard 10 ft min Rear yard 10 ft min

SETBACK – PARKING Front yard 10 ft min Side yard 5 ft min Rear yard 5 ft min

LOT DENSITY AND GREENSPACE Greenspace % min 20% min Maximum floor area ratio 1

RESIDENTIAL DENSITY – Square feet of land area per unit 1,452 Units per acre 30 max (potential for up to 40 units per acre with LEED development and Nanuet beautification bonus) Units per building n/a Bedrooms per unit 1 – 2 bedrooms (maximum of 50% 2 bedroom units) Unit size 1,000 – 1,250 sf COMMERCIAL DENSITY Maximum size of 1st floor commercial 10% of the first floor footprint and commercial frontage must face the rail line

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 56

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

The following graphic offers a conceptual site plan and cross section using proposed area, bulk, and density regulations for TOD Area 2 and a conceptual site plan and cross section for a streetscape program along Prospect Street west of the rail line.

Figure 30: TOD Area 2 Conceptual Site Plan and Cross‐Section for Proposed Area, Bulk, and Density Regulations and Streetscape Program

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 57

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

5.2.4 Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Area 3

Zoning Description

TOD Area 3 is located immediately east of the rail line, with its northern boundary just north of the current Metro‐ North parking lot. The area is currently zoned LIO and HC and is being proposed to be rezoned for mixed use development – commercial uses on the first floor and residential uses above. Of the three TOD areas, TOD Area 3 is proposed to be the most urban in character and serves to act as a continuation of Main Street and provide enough population density to enable Nanuet’s commercial activities to become more lively, diverse, and supportive of a 24‐ hour community. It should be noted that if development within the proposed TOD Area 3 is successful and additional three to four story apartment housing is needed, the Town should consider expanding the TOD Area 3 further north to Market Street, a private road south of the Shops at Nanuet, which connects to First Street to the east.

Within TOD Area 3, as‐of‐right buildings will be three‐to‐four story apartment buildings, with commercial uses exclusive to the first floor. The program of commercial uses would be servicing the overall community living in the Hamlet of Nanuet as well as some commuter services. Residential units located on upper floors of buildings will cater to smaller studio and one bedroom apartments of around 750 sq. ft. to 1,000 sq. ft. in size. These types of residences would appeal to couples, young professionals, ‘empty nesters’ and senior citizens who are looking to downsize but remain in their community. The proposed uses would be required to blend seamlessly into the character of the hamlet center along Main Street. There should be a focus to maintain the existing green space and integrate the Rose Garden into the design as a community focal point.

TOD Area 3 would consist entirely of apartment style building of a height no greater than 45 feet. A total of 40 units per acre would be permitted. However, developers would be eligible for a potential development bonus of 10 additional units per acre for LEED‐certified units and/or additional streetscape beautification efforts. Buildings in TOD Area 3 will be required to maximize street frontages (a minimum of 75 percent of frontage must be used in building program) in order to encourage a continuous streetscape and Main Street‐like design. Additionally, emphasis should be given to building and sidewalk amenities that will tattract foo traffic. The frontage of each buildings first three floors must be setback 5 feet from the lot line and the 4th floor must be setback 15 feet from the properties lot line. This architectural nuance promotes a more open feeling at ground level. Sidewalks of 10 feet in width would align the public right‐of‐way, separated from a two‐way boulevard and lined with trees. The boulevard would contain a t10 foo wide, landscaped median, in order to calm passing vehicular traffic. Vehicle travel lanes would be 12 feet in width with one lane per direction. TOD Area 3 would provide a minimum of 15% green space.

The following figures offer visual examples of what type of design and style buildings that are planned for development in TOD Area 3.

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 58

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Source: The Foundry, Student Apartment Adjacent to Iowa State University’s Ames Campus, Opus AE Group, L.L.C. Figure 31: TOD Area 3 Building Design Example 1

Source: Apartment Bldg. Roosevelt Neighborhood, North Seattle Figure 32: TOD Area 3 Building Design Example 2

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 59

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Figure 33: TOD Area 3 Conceptual Rendering of Prospect Street East of Rail Line

Figure 34: TOD Area 3 Conceptual Rendering of Orchard Street (Southbound Perspective)

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 60

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Area, Bulk and Density Requirements

The following table summarizes the proposed bulk and area requirements for TOD 3.

Table 11: Proposed Area, Bulk and Density Requirements for TOD Area 3

LOT SIZE (min.) Lot size 10,000 s.f. Lot width 60 ft min BUILDING HEIGHT (max.) Principal building 45 ft (4 stories, with 4th floor setback at least 15 ft from lot line )* Accessory building 1 story SETBACK – PRIMARY BUILDING Front yard 5 ft min with 4th floor is setback at least 15 ft from lot line Side yard 10 ft min Rear yard 30 ft min Frontage build out min % At least 75% at front setback Buffer n/a SETBACK – ACCESSORY BUILDING Front yard 5 ft min Side yard 10 ft min Rear yard 10 ft min SETBACK – PARKING Front yard 10 ft min Side yard 5 ft min Rear yard 5 ft min LOT DENSITY AND GREENSPACE Greenspace % min 15% min Maximum floor area ratio 1.5 RESIDENTIAL DENSITY – Square feet of land area per unit 1,089 Units per acre 40 max (potential for up to 50 units per acre with LEED development and Nanuet beautification bonus) Units per building n/a Bedrooms per unit Studios, 1, and 2 bedrooms (maximum of 50% 2 bedroom units) Unit size 750 – 1,000 sf COMMERCIAL DENSITY Maximum size of 1st floor commercial 100%

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 61

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

The following graphic offers a conceptual site plan and cross section using proposed area, bulk, and density regulations for TOD Area 3 and a conceptual site plan and cross section for a streetscape program along Prospect Street east of the rail line.

Figure 35: TOD Area 3 Conceptual Site Plan and Cross‐Section for Proposed Area, Bulk, and Density Regulations and Streetscape Program

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 62

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

5.2.5 Hamlet Commercial (HC)

The Hamlet Commercial (HC) area, comprising the current core of the historic downtown Nanuet, is defined as the area along Main Street (Middletown Road) and is currently zoned for Hamlet Commercial (HC) uses. This area is to remain as currently zoned; mixed‐use with ground floor commercial and one or two residential stories above. The only proposed modification to the existing zoning is to increase the maximum building height from 28 feet to 35 feet. The most significant improvement to the Main Street area would be landscape and streetscape improvements, as well as targeted infill development opportunities. It is proposed that a “beautification bank” be created for the sole purpose of collecting funds from developers of TOD Area 1, 2, and 3 and reinvested through a single vision and program of streetscape and beautification enhancements along Main Street.

The following illustration offers a conceptual rendering of what potential beatification enhancements may look like along Main Street.

Figure 36: Conceptual Rendering of Streetscape and Beautification Enhancements to Main Street

The following illustration provides offers conceptual site plan and cross section for a streetscape program along Main Street.

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 63

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Figure 37: HC Conceptual Site Plan and Cross‐Section for Streetscape Program Along Main Street

5.3 Infrastructure

5.3.1 Transportation Infrastructure

Several new vehicular and pedestrian connections are proposed. These connections would improve circulation and facilitate access from the transit hub to the adjacent commercial and retail development within the TOD area.

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 64

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

PROPOSED

Figure 38: Proposed Transportation Infrastructure Improvements

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 65

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

As illustrated in Figure 38, a new one‐way southbound vehicular connection from First Street to Prospect Street would run mostly parallel to Main Street – on its western side. This roadway would provide a critical link between the train station and the commercial/retail development to the north, while also alleviating existing congestion on Main Street. It should be noted, that if Nanuet Mall South is rezoned in the future to TOD Area 3 and, the property owner would need to take the one‐way southbound portion of new Orchard Street into consideration and should plan for a bi‐ directional two lane vehicular travel way. In addition, traffic signals at the intersection of Market Street and the proposed northern extension of Orchard Street and the intersection of Main Street and First Street would require signal coordination.

In addition, the proposed northern extension of Orchard Street would also create exposure to new development on the Post Office parcel and activate the on‐street environment on parcels north of Prospect Street and east of Main Street. South of Prospect Street, improvements to Orchard Street and the creation of a street grid with new east‐west roadways that connect to Main Street will improves acces and mobility throughout the Hamlet of Nanuet. The new roadway will be designed based on best practices for complete streets, incorporating traffic calming and green infrastructure elements to contribute to the treatment of storm water runoff from rooftops and impervious surfaces. Figure 39: Example of a Multi‐Use Path

A new multi‐use path is recommended to improve north‐south pedestrian/cyclist mobility along the eastern edge of the rail line, but not within the railroad right‐of‐way. It would provide additional access from the mixed‐use development around the train station to The Shops at Nanuet and the regional shopping activities. The new multi‐use path will be constructed with a hard surface of adequate width for two way pedestrians and slow moving cyclists. Lush vegetation will provide a visual buffer from the rail road tracks and seating areas will be provided at regular intervals. This segment of path may be integrated into a future roadway connecting local and regional green spaces, as well as retail and commercial uses, to public transportation nodes.

5.3.2 Parking

A key component of the Nanuet TOD planning process is to prepare for evolving parking needs as a factor in the area’s transformative landscape. In consultations with residents of the area, public parking has been identified as being a concern that will need a careful consideration during the TOD planning process. The follow discussion presents the proposal outlined under the TOD plan:

The Nanuet TOD planning process addresses existing parking in the Hamlet and additional parking infrastructure development on the proposed new roads. Modifications to current parking include:

 Enhanced enforcements;

 Improved signage; and

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 66

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

 Establishing a parking agreement(s) with MTA Metro‐North.

Enhanced Enforcement:

From the outreach for TOD planning process, public comment stated that the 2‐hour parking along Main Street is not actively enforced, which reduce the turnover of parking and creates a perceived shortage in parking availability. Also mentioned was the issue of parking availed by the establishment owners and their employees who typically need to stay for extended durations during business hours. Time limited parking and its enforcement along the business/commercial areas of the TOD are of high importance to tackle the parking availability in the area.

Improved Signage:

Information on parking availability in the TOD area is of importance for managing the need and availability of parking across the area. This measure is aimed at educating riders about available parking at various locations in the vicinity as well as better managing parking demand in key locations like the intersection of Prospect and Main St.

Parking Agreement with MTA Metro-North:

The changes in development across the TOD area will have to be matched with appropriate availability for parking. Apart from the existing parking facilities and their optimized use to meet the demand, Town of Clarkstown should consider leveraging other areas for parking to meet the demand and provide adequate parking to patrons of businesses and citizens overall in the area. This will require identification, coordination, and provision of parking across the TOD area. Among the options that may be available for consideration include:

 The MTA parking lot currently has paid parking spaces available, but there could be provision for arranging for a section of parking to be allotted for retail parking or parking for business owners and their employees.

 Providing parking vouchers to business owners and their employees to park in MTA parking lot in order to open up parking along Main Street.

New Roadway Infrastructure:

The following options address parking on new roadway infrastructure:

 On‐street parking on new road infrastructure;

 Moving the County parking lot to the train station by swapping land that includes allotment of land of a similar size39; and

 Evaluate and establish metered parking along Main Street;

Some of the actions regarding existing and proposed new parking may need careful additional consideration and thorough parking studies to estimate changes in parking demand due to the influx of development and the types of commercial facilities that may induce travel demand from the surrounding areas that may involve the need for parking for short, and long periods in the Nanuet TOD area during various times of the day. It should be noted, that over the

39 Note: the concept of relocating the County lot would first need to be coordinated with the Rockland County Department of Public Transportation and NYSDOT. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 67

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

course of the TOD construction, there should be no loss in Railroad commuter parking. Once completed however, customers should actually see in an increase in parking availability in order to accommodate future growth.

5.4 Programmatic Elements

Programmatic elements include those additional recommendations designed to supplement zoning and transportation improvements. These includes civic (public) uses including public spaces, parks and recreation facilities, pedestrian amenities, water infrastructure, as well as lighting and electrical infrastructure recommendations.

5.4.1 Civic Spaces, Parks and Recreation Facilities

Streetscape and pedestrian space improvements are proposed for the Main Street (South Middletown Road) retail corridor and Prospect Street. The improvements include short‐ and long‐term improvements to create a vibrant, attractive, and enjoyable pedestrian environment and also improve the safety, navigation, glow and overall quality of the vehicular travel experience. Investment in the shared public ROW will enhance the user experience, promote economic activity and encourage private investment in property. Physical improvements will also provide a foundation for the planned TOD district and solidify the connection of future land development to Nanuet’s character.

In the short‐term, the use of a consistent design language along Main Street will strengthen the sense of place as a local retail and dining destination, accentuating Main Street’s historic character and pedestrian scale. Design elements will include street furniture (benches, recycling bins, light poles), hard scape materials (sidewalk borders, curbs), and signage (identification and directional). Public art, accent lighting and containerized vegetation may be introduced to further define, energize and enliven the pedestrian space. Design treatment of street corners and crosswalks will assure accessibility and pedestrian safety with tactile and visual cues, and Figure 40: Example of a Multi‐Use Path suitable pedestrian drop‐curbs.

Main Street can be understood as a linear space made up of a series of linked experiences. Each experience along the corridor adds to the overall perception of the urban environment. Each experience also serves a navigational function such as entry, transition, arrival or connection. Three intersections have been identified for treatment focused on reinforcement of specific navigational function:

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 68

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

 Entry/ Gateway: Church Street Intersection

 Arrival/ Center: Prospect Street Intersection

 Transition/ connection : Market Street Intersection

Special attention will be paid to the design of directional signage and pedestrian amenities at each of these intersections. Design elements may include seating, paving materials, public art and vegetation to emphasize nodal quality of the intersection and its navigational function. This focused treatment will begin to create a hierarchical structure to be carried through the TOD district.

Short‐term recommendations include: enforcing existing regulations and creating new guidance to include incentives for commercial façade improvements, review of existing regulations and guidance for signage, and a strategy to reduce vehicle crossing of sidewalks (at parking lot access and automobile oriented businesses).

In the long‐term, a more extensive reorganization of the urban structure will be implemented. In addition to the short term aesthetic improvements, the roadway network will be redesigned, creating new vehicular connections from north of the study area to the train station. Providing new vehicular Figure 41: Pocket Park and Street Furniture travel‐ways will alleviate traffic on Main Street and allow for the realignment of travel lanes to better accommodate multimodal transportation. Prospect Street will become an attractive boulevard, with a significant vegetated median and activated pedestrian spaces, strengthening the east‐west connection for both vehicular and alternative transportation modes. A new public green‐space fronting on Prospect Street west of the proposed relocated County Parking Lot and the existing Veteran’s Memorial Garden located just east of the track crossing will be expanded and improved to function as a central hamlet green.

A new multi‐use path from the train station to existing retail centers north of the study area will be introduced to provide an essential connection for shoppers and employees. Sidewalks, roadways and public areas will be designed with adequate space for alternative transportation modes and pedestrian amenities to support the active urban environment envisioned in the TOD plan.

These public amenities will play a significant role in the character and accessibility of the TOD neighborhood. As a Figure 42: Pedestrian Crosswalk Improvements

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 69

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

result, it is recommended that the TOD developers play a big role in the development of these amenities when constructing and maintaining their properties. This can be achieved effectively by enticing developers through development bonuses in exchange for going ‘above and beyond’ to promote environmentally sustainable initiatives and public spaces.

Main Street

The design and realignment of Main Street will include complete streets elements such as bike lanes and/or shared lane markings and traffic calming techniques such as bulb outs at corners and pedestrian crossings. Regulations for signage and façade treatments will be updated to create a unified image for the historic retail corridor. Regulations for infill buildings, additions and new construction will encourage the strengthening of a consistent street wall and building height, and appropriate architectural styles and materials.

Prospect Street

The TOD Plan envisions a lively, vibrant and active pedestrian‐scale character with uses supporting the needs of local residents and a new mix of residential and commercial development. The reconstructed Prospect Street will take on a boulevard‐like character with ample green space and high quality hard scape materials. A wide vegetated median and regularly spaced canopy trees along the curb line will create a strong visual connection between Main Street and the Nanuet Train Station.

Planning of the shared ROW will prioritize the pedestrian experience with a dual focus on safety and enjoyment. Building setback regulations for new development along Prospect Street in TOD Areas 1 and 2 promote consistent retail frontages. The dimensional and use requirements for new construction assure sufficient pedestrian space within the public ROW with zones allocated for utilities, signage, street furniture and quasi‐public uses such as café seating.

Source: Marquette, Michigan, Credit: Brad Neumann Figure 43: Urban Design Showcasing Consistent Street Frontages

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 70

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

5.4.2 Pedestrian Space Design

The design of the public spaces and building facades within the TOD will adhere to comprehensive Pedestrian and Public Recreation Space Design Guidelines. This document will be created to provide guidance to architects and landscape architects for the design of both private and publically funded projects. It will establish a cohesive design vision for the design of the hamlet’s urban environment and a flexible system of design tools, materials, treatments and dimensions guidance to assure consistency while allowing for the creativity and expression necessary in creating a unique sense of place. Figure 44: Example of Streetscape Beautification

5.4.3 Public Buildings, Schools, Police, Fire Stations, Municipal Buildings

Long‐term redevelopment of TOD Area 2 would include the potential relocation of the County municipal parking lot from its current location to just west of the railroad tracks on the north side of Prospect Street. However, this conceptual relocation would require coordination with the County Department of Public Transportation ande th New York State Department of Transportation (DOT), and final approval by Rockland County. Long term redevelopment within TOD Area 3 could include the relocation of some or all of the functions at the U.S. Post Office sorting facility to a proximate location. Any repurposing of this parcel, could incorporate some Post Office services, while the more space intensive uses associated with sorting and distribution could be relocated along Route 59. It should be noted, that since a goal of TOD is to provide sustainable development with densities and land uses that complement the use of transit systems and residents not relying on automobiles for everyday activities (including the use of existing transit infrastructure); an analysis and consideration of impacts to transit infrastructure (including but not limited to Nanuet Station facilities and grade crossings) will need to be performed for each development application. Additionally, mitigation measures, such as but not limited to improvement to the pedestrian grade crossing, striping, signage, wayfinding, etc., may be required to accommodate the additional use and/or traffic associated with new development within TOD Area 1, 2, and 3, and should be considered accordingly.

5.4.2 Water, Stormwater, and Wastewater Infrastructure

Preliminary evaluation of current potable water and wastewater infrastructure has indicated sufficient available capacity to accommodate short‐ and long‐term recommendations. Any proposed redevelopment project within the TOD Zone would require a site specific environmental review as part of the Town of Clarkstown Site Plan Approval process during which project‐generated utility demand would be evaluated. Similarly, all development would be required to incorporate suitable stormwater management practices into their Site Plan. Development within the low‐ lying areas of TOD Areas 2 and 3, which are known to be prone to flooding during high intensity short duration storms (i.e., the former Fire Station) would be required to incorporate sufficient stormwater management practices or otherwise mitigate the impacts of developing in a flood zone.

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 71

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

5.4.5 Light-Emitting Diode (LED) Lighting

Installing Light‐Emitting Diode (LED) lighting in the TOD area is cost‐effective, energy efficient, and has safety implications for residents. Community lighting is typically funded by public money and instructing utility companies to install LED lights or worked into development agreements where common amenities and other lighting can preferably beD using LE technology. In the context of a TOD, which is driven by the objective of increased mobility and alternative means of transportation including bicycle and pedestrian travel, LED lighting has improved visibility on sidewalks, transit stops, and multi‐purpose pathways, thereby reducing risk of conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles. Optimized lighting using LED lights has larger public safety benefits by eliminating dark spots.

The Town of Clarkstown already maintains a policy of including LED lighting within publicly sponsored or funded projects; which supports the environmental goal established in the Town’s Comprehensive Plan to reducing the municipal carbon footprint by way of energy efficiency. It is anticipated that this practice would continue when improving the streetscape and urban environment of Nanuet.

5.4.6 Electrical Utilities

During consultations with the project stakeholders and the community at‐large, the appearance of existing electrical utility lines was identified as an issue affecting the aesthetics of the Nanuet Hamlet. Though the preference is to move overhead electrical wiring underground, it is extremely cost‐prohibitive; both in terms of physically moving the lines below ground as well as relocating all building connections along Main Street to support buried wiring hook‐ups. Additionally, moving wiring underground will create a secondary negative aesthetic impact, since underground wiring would require above ground junction boxes that would negatively impact the streetscape both aesthetically and physically. As such, this concern should be addressed through utility line consolidation. Utility line consolidation would focus on reducing the number of electrical wires (if technically possible) and consolidating them to one side of the street to reduce clutter; similarly as has been done in other parts of the Town.

5.4.7 Electrical Vehicle (EV) Parking Figure 45: Example of Above Ground Junction Box Interfering with According to the Clarkstown Zoning Code, “electric vehicle (EV) use Streetscape in Park Ridge supports the Town of Clarkstown transportation and environmental goals of the Clarkstown Comprehensive Plan by reducing commercial and personal vehicle emissions and thereby mitigating impacts from mobile pollution sources”. By code, Level 1 and 2 electric vehicle charging stations are permittede in th Commercial Office (CO) District to serve both commercial and public vehicles and may be located adjacent to public parking stalls. The Commercial Office District is located approximately ½ mile north of the Nanuet Train Station, adjacent to the Shops at Nanuet and just south of Route 59. Level 3 charging stations are limited to commercial vehicles only. It is recommended that the creation of EV parking availability should be encouraged and

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 72

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

enabled in proposed zoning for TOD Area’s 1, 2 and 3. It should be noted that upon the writing of this report, the Town of Clarkstown is actively considering a local law that would allow Level 1 and 2 EV charging stations in all non‐ residential districts as‐of‐right, which should include the proposed TOD Areas 1, 2, and 3 in the future.

5.4.8 Integration of LEED ND Design Principles

The TOD Plan recommends incentivizing the use of Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) principles. LEED is a rating system designed by the United States Green Building Council (USGBC) to evaluate the environmental performance of a building and to encourage market transformation towards sustainable design. LEED advocates for incorporation ofn gree infrastructure into buildings, connecting spaces and other neighborhood elements as a tool for fostering livable communities. In addition to the incorporation of suitable waste and storm water infrastructure, LED lighting and electrical vehicle charging as previously described, the use of sustainable building materials, water efficient landscaping and minimization of impervious surfaces could also be incorporated into the TOD construction. Increased density and mix of land‐use ultimately improves the LEED rating of facilities. LEED‐incorporated high density infill development encourages walking and other alternative forms of transportation, especially in a context such of the Greater Nanuet TOD Area. Incorporating these design principles into projects can be encouraged by granting a development bonus in the form of an additional recessed floor or in other appropriate ways. Additional potential incentives could include tax credits and expedited review/permitting processes.

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 73

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

6.0 Cost Estimates for Proposed Infrastructure and Programmatic Elements

The following section provides order of magnitude cost estimates for infrastructure and programmatic elements proposed with the TOD Plan, bundled together as treatment packages. Treatment packages are a grouped set of infrastructure and programmatic elements that are applied together to create an implementable project. Within a particular geographic area one or more treatment packages could be combined to create a single project. Table 12 summarizes the various infrastructure and programmatic elements proposed within the TOD Plan and organizes them into treatment packages. Each treatment package has an estimated liner cost per foot to implement the treatment package (with its bundled infrastructure and programmatic elements included). The liner cost per foot estimates were calculated using modeled hypothetical examples. Creating generic model costs was done so a singular treatment packages cost estimate could be generated and then applied to the proposed program with actual linear dimensions within Nanuet for planning purposes. Table 13 provides a summery of the proposed treatment packages within different areas within the Nanuet TOD study area and the estimated cost to implement those treatments. Figure 46 summarizes the areas within the Nanuet TOD study area that have been proposed for one or more treatment packages. When summed, the estimated cost of implementing all proposed infrastructure and programmatic elements is around 13 million dollars, not including required right‐of‐way acquisition.

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 74

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Figure 46: Identification of Infrastructure and Programmatic Project Area

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 75

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Table 12: Cost Estimate of Bundled Treatment Packages of Proposed Infrastructure and Programmatic Elements

*** Rough, order of magnitude cost estimate for planning purposes only, not an engineer's estimate*** * unless otherwise noted, calculations below are based on 300 LF of roadway

Planted Median, 10' wide unit unit cost quant est cost cost rounded Concrete Curb LF $ 28.00 650 $ 18,200.00 Soil CY $ 75.00 20 $ 1,500.00 Planting Materials allowance $ 15,000.00 1 $ 15,000.00 $ 34,700.00 Estimated Cost / LF $ 115.67 $ 120.00

Sidewalk and Parking/ Stormwater Zone, 8' wide (one side of street) assumed areas Total area (18' w) 5400 SF Pedestrian Travel (+/‐8' wide ) 2800 SF Surface area at Street Trees ( 5' x 10', 8 total) 400 SF Parking Spots (8' x 22', 8 total) 1800 SF (Table 12 continued) assumed areas Bioswales (5' x 10', 2 total) 100 SF Bulbouts (8' x 20', 2 total) 350 SF unit unit cost quant est cost cost rounded Concrete Pavement SF $ 5.00 3500 $ 17,500.00 Concrete Curb LF $ 28.00 300 $ 8,400.00 Tree Pits (soil and curbing‐ trees separate item) EA $ 1,200.00 8 $ 9,600.00 Planting Materials allowance $ 15,000.00 1 $ 15,000.00 ADA Drop Curb EA $ 4,000.00 4 $ 16,000.00 Asphalt SF $ 17.00 1800 $ 30,600.00 $ 97,100.00 Estimated Cost / LF $ 323.67 $ 325.00

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 76

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Vehicle travel lanes, two direction‐ total 24' travelway unit unit cost quant est cost cost rounded Asphalt (12*300*2) SF $ 17.00 7200 $ 122,400.00 Painted lines and markings allowance $ 2,000.00 1 $ 2,000.00

$ 137,400.00 Estimated Cost / LF $ 458.00 $ 460.00

Street Furniture (benches, bike racks, street lights) unit unit cost quant est cost cost rounded Overhead Street Lights EA $ 10,000.00 8 $ 80,000.00 Pedestrian Street Lights EA $ 6,000.00 8 $ 48,000.00 Benches EA $ 2,000.00 4 $ 8,000.00 Bike racks EA $ 1,000.00 4 $ 4,000.00 $ 140,000.00 Estimated Cost / LF $ 466.67 $ 470.00

Green Infrastructure (bioswales assume 2 each side for 300 LF) unit unit cost quant est cost cost rounded Bioswales EA $ 2,000.00 4 $ 8,000.00 Misc. infrastructure allowance $ 10,000.00 1 $ 10,000.00 Estimated Unit Pricing $ 10,500.00 $ 10,500.00

Multi‐use Path, 8' wide unit unit cost quant est cost cost rounded (using length of 1000 LF for calculations) Asphalt SF $ 17.00 8000 $ 136,000.00 Pedestrian Street Lights EA $ 6,000.00 16 $ 96,000.00 Benches EA $ 2,000.00 4 $ 8,000.00

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 77

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Bike racks EA $ 1,000.00 2 $ 2,000.00 Vegetation allowance $ 20,000.00 1 $ 20,000.00 Painted Lines and symbols allowance $ 2,000.00 1 $ 2,000.00 Bollards EA $ 500.00 10 $ 5,000.00 $ 269,000.00 Estimated Unit Pricing / LF $ 269.00 $ 270.00

Crosswalks with Pavers (8' x 50' + lines) unit unit cost quant est cost cost rounded EA $ 6,500.00 Estimated Unit Pricing $ 6,500.00 $ 6,500.00

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 78

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Table 13: Planning Cost Estimate for Proposed Project Areas

*** Rough, order of magnitude estimate for planning purposes only, not an engineer's estimate***

Area 'A': Prospect East (500 linear feet) Length of design element / Estimated cost for Elements included: number of units Estimated Cost/ LF planning purposes Planted Median, 10' wide 380 $ 120.00 $ 45,600.00 Open space improvements allowance 1 $ 500,000.00 $ 500,000.00 North Sidewalk, 10' wide, and Parking/ Stormwater Zone, 8' wide (one side of street) 440 $ 325.00 $ 143,000.00 South Sidewalk , 10' wide, and Parking/ Stormwater Zone, 8' wide (one side of street) 420 $ 325.00 $ 136,500.00 New Orchard South, , 10' wide, and Parking/ Stormwater Zone, 8' wide (one side of street) 250 $ 325.00 $ 81,250.00 Vehicle travel lanes, two direction‐ total 24' travelway 500 $ 460.00 $ 230,000.00 Typical Street Furniture (benches, bike racks, street lights) 500 $ 470.00 $ 235,000.00 Bioswales and related infrastructure 6 $ 10,500.00 $ 63,000.00 Cross walks 7 $ 6,500.00 $ 45,500.00 $ 1,479,850.00

Area 'B': Prospect West (600 linear feet) Length of design element / Estimated cost for Elements included: number of units Estimated Cost/ LF planning purposes North Sidewalk, 10' wide, and Parking/ Stormwater Zone, 8' wide (one side of street) 550 $ 325.00 $ 178,750.00 South Sidewalk, 10' wide, and Parking/ Stormwater Zone, 8' wide (one side of street) 600 $ 325.00 $ 195,000.00 Vehicle travel lanes, two direction‐ total 24' travelway 600 $ 460.00 $ 276,000.00 Typical Street Furniture (benches, bike racks, street lights) 600 $ 470.00 $ 282,000.00 Bioswales and related infrastructure 6 $ 10,500.00 $ 63,000.00 Crosswalks 4 $ 6,500.00 $ 26,000.00 $ 1,020,750.00

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 79

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

Area 'C': Multi Purpose Path (1,000 linear feet) Length of design Estimated cost for Elements included: Element Estimated Cost/ LF planning purposes Multi Purpose Path 1000 $ 270.00 $ 270,000.00

Area 'D': Main Street (2,000 linear feet) Length of design Element/ Estimated cost for Elements included: number of units Estimated Cost/ LF planning purposes East Sidewalk, 10' wide, and Parking/ Stormwater Zone, 8' wide (one side of street) 1750 $ 325.00 $ 568,750.00 West Sidewalk, 10' wide, and Parking/ Stormwater Zone, 8' wide (one side of street) 1750 $ 325.00 $ 568,750.00 Typical Street Furniture (benches, bike racks, street lights) 2000 $ 470.00 $ 940,000.00 Bioswales and related infrastructure 10 $ 10,500.00 $ 105,000.00 Crosswalks 20 $ 6,500.00 $ 130,000.00 $ 2,312,500.00

Area 'E': Other TOD Zone Roadways (aggregate 5,000 linear feet) Length of design Element/ Estimated cost for Elements included: number of units Estimated Cost/ LF planning purposes East Sidewalk, 10' wide, and Parking/ Stormwater Zone, 8' wide (one side of street) 4500 $ 325.00 $ 1,462,500.00 West Sidewalk, 10' wide, and Parking/ Stormwater Zone, 8' wide (one side of street) 4500 $ 325.00 $ 1,462,500.00 Vehicle travel lanes, two direction‐ total 24' travelway 5000 $ 460.00 $ 2,300,000.00 Typical Street Furniture (benches, bike racks, street lights) 5000 $ 470.00 $ 2,350,000.00 Bioswales and related infrastructure 20 $ 10,500.00 $ 210,000.00 Cross walks 20 $ 6,500.00 $ 130,000.00 $ 7,915,000.00

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 80

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

7.0 Implementation Strategy

The implementation strategy is divided into short‐term and long‐term strategies to drive the growth of a vibrant TOD neighborhood centered on the Nanuet Train Station. This strategy is especially important in helping the Town of Clarkstown to identify those elements and improvements that could be addressed in the short ‐term within a relatively quick timespan. Additionally, the strategy also will also assist in identifying more comprehensive improvements that may require assistance from the TOD developer and which may also take longer to implement. Table 14 summarizes those short‐ and long‐term strategies.

Table 14: Summary of Short‐Term and Long‐Term Strategies

Short Term Long Term (1‐5 Years) (5‐15 Years) Signage Complete Streets (to be implemented locally upon completion of each new development) Hamlet Center Parking Multi‐Use Path Hamlet Center Street Furniture Prospect Street Boulevard Upgrade Hamlet Center Public Art Development of New Streets Hamlet Center Recycling Bins New Transportation Infrastructure Temporary Traffic Calming Measures Electric‐Vehicle Parking Accommodation Overhead Electrical Utility Wire Consolidation

7.1 Short-Term (1-5 years)

The proposed short‐term recommendations are focused on laying a foundation for appropriate development, and do not include any land acquisition or significant public investment, unlike the long‐term recommendations which are almost exclusively dependent on the private sector to embrace proposed TOD zoning. Most notably, these elements include neighborhood signage and existing parking. Signage improvements could be achieved by developing a common signage design throughout the entire Hamlet center and areas to the west of the Nanuet Train Station. In addition to points of interest, the signage would prioritize locations for bus and rail transportation, as well as taxi/passenger drop‐offs and pick‐ups. The signage could additionally be implemented in areas where TOD would be expected to occur, with the ability to update the signage once development is actually complete. Parking could be improved by further exploring opportunities and coordination with Metro‐North Railroad and through further assessing the existing parking conditions within the Hamlet Center.

In addition to these elements, additional urban design elements such as street furniture, public art and ‘green’ recycling bins could also be implemented throughout the Hamlet Center. Temporary strategies for traffic calming, in the form of additional and/or widened painted pedestrian crossings could also be explored. It is anticipated that implementation and updates to these elements could be implemented in a one to five year timetable.

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 81

Hamlet of Nanuet Transit Oriented Development Plan

7.2 Long-Term (6-15 years)

The proposed long‐term recommendations further the development potential expected for completion in the short‐ term, and leverages those successes to introduce new development potential and a series of publicly funded transportation infrastructure improvements with a projected five to fifteen year timeline for implementation. Unlike those proposed short‐term recommendations, long‐term recommendations are almost entirely dependent on the private sector to embrace TOD zoning guidelines and begin construction of new units. Long‐term elements include those new transportation and water infrastructure, electric‐vehicle accommodation and the consolidation of overhead electrical utility wiring.

The most significant implementations would address transportation improvements through the construction of new streets throughout all three of the proposed TOD areas. To further enhance pedestrian connectivity the proposed multi‐use path would be constructed to connect the TOD areas and Hamlet Center to the Nanuet Train Station. Prospect Street would be upgraded into a landscaped median boulevard culminating in a downtown pedestrian square. Upon completion of new units, those identified complete street designs could be immediately implemented.

As previously identified, these recommendations require extensive input from private sector developers, as they go beyond the financial capabilities of the Town of Clarkstown. To overcome this, a beautification bank could be set up that would require contribution from developers in exchange for the ability to construct additional units. Alternatively, those developers that choose to implement these recommendations on their own, could be given the same bonus of being able to construct additional units. This strategy functions to increase the developers’ profit margins while also further contributing to the goals and objectives of the TOD Plan.

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 82