East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study

Village of East Aurora

Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study

2003

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................1 1.1 Study Area Boundaries .................................................................................................................. 1 2. THE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK .................................................................................2 2.1 Transit ............................................................................................................................................ 2 2.2 Bicycle Route................................................................................................................................. 2 2.3 Pedestrian Facilities ....................................................................................................................... 3 3. EXISTING CONDITIONS .......................................................................................................5 3.1 Traffic Volumes............................................................................................................................. 5 3.2 Traffic Growth ............................................................................................................................. 11 3.3 Pedestrian Volumes ..................................................................................................................... 12 3.4 Capacity Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 13 3.5 Accident Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 18 3.6 Facility Conditions....................................................................................................................... 27 4. EAST AURORA PARKING STUDY .....................................................................................32 4.1 Introduction.................................................................................................................................. 32 4.2 Categorization.............................................................................................................................. 36 4.3 Parking Usage .............................................................................................................................. 37 4.4 Potential Parking Problem Areas................................................................................................. 40 5. TRAFFIC OPTIONS – EXISTING TRAFFIC and CIRCULATON ....................................42 5.1 The Circle .................................................................................................................................... 42 5.2 Railroad Underpasses .................................................................................................................. 42 5.3 Brick Pavement............................................................................................................................ 43 5.4 Grey Street Plaza ......................................................................................................................... 43 5.5 Route 400 Interchange ................................................................................................................. 44 5.6 Create Gateways .......................................................................................................................... 44 6. CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................................45 APPENDICES APPENDIX A – Existing Pavement Widths for Main St APPENDIX B – Existing Intersection Analysis – AM and PM Conditions APPENDIX C – Parking Survey Detailed Results

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11 Figure 12 Figure 13 Figure 14 Figure 15 Figure 16 Figure 17 Figure 18 Figure 19 Figure 20 Figure 21 Figure 22 Figure 23 Figure 24 Figure 25 Figure 26 Figure 27 Figure 28 Figure 29 Figure 30 Figure 31 Figure 32 Figure 33 Figure 34 Figure 35 Figure 36 Figure 37

Page

Study Area Boundaries ……………….………………………………..

Village of Aurora NFTA Bus Routes ………………………………….

Bicycle Level of Service……………………………………………….

Traffic Circle…………………………………………………………..

Commercial Driveway…………………………………………………

Sidewalk Buffer………………………………………………………..

Commercial Parking Lot……………………………………………….

Pedestrian Crosswalks…………………………………………………

Pedestrian Amenities…………………………………………………...

Main and North Streets………………………………………………...

Village of Aurora Functional Classification …………………………..

Average Daily Traffic Volumes Village of East Aurora ………………

Main Street Traffic Volumes ………………………………………….

Rt. 20A Quaker Road/Hamburg Street ………………………………..

Maple Street at Center Street Traffic Volumes………………………..

Route 20A at Grey Street Traffic Volumes…………………………….

The Traffic Circle ……………………………………………………...

VMT Growth …………………………………………………………..

Intersection Pedestrian Crossing Village of East Aurora ……………...

Intersection Turning Count Locations …………………………………

Level of Service – Main – Pine – Olean ………………………………

Level of Service – Hamburg at Oakwood ……………………………..

Hamburg Route 20 at Mill …………………………………………….

Local Highway Accident History/Analysis ……………………………

NY State Highway Accident History/Analysis ………………………..

Generalized Verbal Descriptions of Conditioned Rating ……………...

Scores for Roadway Surface Scores …………………………………...

Pavement Condition Map ……………………………………………...

East Aurora Parking Area Map ………………………………………..

The Circle………………………………………………………………

Main Street Overpass…………………………………………………..

Oakwood Overpass…………………………………………………….

Brick Pavement………………………………………………………...

Grey Street Plaza……………………………………………………….

Route 400 Interchange…………………………………………………

Western Gateway………………………………………………………

Northwestern Gateway…………………………………………………

Eastern Gateway………………………………………………………..

1 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 7 8 9 9 9 10 11 11 12 16 17 17 17 21 22 28 31 34 42 43 43 43 43 44 44 45 45

LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 Table 7 Table 8 Table 9 Table 10 Table 11 Table 12 Table 13 Table 14

Village and Town Traffic Counts and Road Scores ……………………….

Breakdown of Traffic Entering and Exiting the Traffic Circle ……………

Pedestrian Counts at Intersections …………………………………………

Capacity Analysis AM Peak ………………………………………………

Capacity Analysis PM Peak ……………………………………………….

Accident Analysis Summary – Linear Road Sections …………………….

Accident Analysis Summary – Intersections ……………………………...

Town of Aurora Local Roadway Accident Type Summary ………………

Town of Aurora Local Roadway Collision Type Summary ………………

Town of Aurora Local Intersection Accident Type Summary …………….

Town of Aurora Local Intersection Collision Type Summary ……………

Town of Aurora Potential Safety Deficient NYS Highway Segments ……

Summary of the Pavement Conditions - August 2002 …………………….

Parking Survey Results ……………………………………………………

Page 6 10 13 14 15 19 20 18 23 23 24 26 29 35

1. INTRODUCTION The Village of East Aurora is facing the prospect of many recent and pending developments along the Main Street corridor in the Village of East Aurora that may affect traffic and circulation patterns. An area of specific concern is the traffic circle at the west end (downtown area) of the Village, where Routes 20A and 78/16 converge. In addition to deteriorating traffic conditions along Main Street there is also the concern that as traffic congestion increases along Main Street, ‘West End” travelers may utilize residential streets as alternative traffic routes. These transportation issues, combined with the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) plans to reconstruct Main Street (Rt. 20A, 16, and 78) has provided the Village an opportunity to study the potential impacts and/or identify improvements to the transportation system.

The purpose of the Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking, and Circulation Study is to evaluate conditions within the Village of East Aurora and to identify locations ideal for system improvements.

The study identifies current and future transportation needs and recommends transportation system improvements and programs to efficiently serve the corridor’s travel needs.

1.1 Study Area Boundaries The study area extends along Route 20A, Route 16, Route 78, and includes major collector roads such as Maple Street (from Route 400 to Route 20A), Center Street, Porterville Road, Bowen Road, Knox Road, and Mill Road. Figure 1 shows the study area.

Figure 1 Study Area Boundaries

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 1

2. THE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK 2.1 Transit The Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority (NFTA) currently operates three bus routes providing public transportation from East Aurora to Downtown Buffalo; Route 75 (Buffalo to West Seneca), Route 15 (Buffalo to Seneca), and Route 70 (Buffalo to Holland) (See Figure 2). Bus service is available on all routes from Monday to Friday. Currently there is no bus service on the weekends. In the Village, bus stops are located along US Route 20A/NY Route 16/78 (Main Street) from the Traffic circle to Pine Street/Olean Street (NY Route 16) at all major intersections.

Between 40 and 50 residents of Aurora (Town and Village) utilize public transit each weekday based upon the most recent transit survey conducted during the spring of 2002. The majority of riders patronize the Route 70 service and travel to downtown Buffalo for work purposes.

Village of East Aurora – NFTA Bus Route Figure 2

2.2 Bicycle Route Although there are currently no designated New York State Bicycle Routes in the Village, the Regional Comprehensive Plan (2002) proposes hike and bike trails throughout the Village of East Aurora. Trails are proposed along the length of Main Street (Route 20A) and Girard Street, with connections to recreational areas and parks such as Sinking Ponds, Old Baldy Park, Hamlin Park, and Knox State Park.

Figure 3 shows the Bicycle Level of Service on major roadways in the Village. Most of the Village’s roadways are rated good or very good for on-street biking.

Bicycle Level of Service Figure 3

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 2

2.3 Pedestrian Facilities Pedestrian facilities in the form of sidewalks are present along all roads in the Village of East Aurora, with exception of areas surrounding the Village border. The Regional Comprehensive Plan (2002) stresses the importance of walking and the preservation of the pedestrian friendly atmosphere throughout the Village, specifically the need for walkability of Central Business District and its connections to surrounding residential and recreational/park areas.

A walkabout conducted during Summer 2002 along the Main Street Corridor revealed a number of noteworthy observations concerning pedestrian issues in the Village.

The traffic circle, although an important traffic calming measure, currently creates an uncomfortable situation for pedestrians to cross the road (see Figure 4). A possible solution is to build pedestrian refuge islands where the triangle marking in the road currently exists. This would allow the pedestrian to cross in front of one direction of traffic and then safely wait for the next direction to clear.

Figure 4 The west end of Traffic Circle Main Street in East Aurora has many driveways for commercial stores (see Figure 5). Driveway consolidations would cut down on the number of entrances and exits that could be dangerous to bicyclists and pedestrians.

Figure 5 Commercial Driveway A buffer of green grass or trees would help delineate the separation between vehicles and pedestrians (see Figure 6).

Buffers and park benches added to a commercial street can create an appealing park-like setting for residents and visitors.

Figure 6 Sidewalk Buffers

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 3

Historically, businesses have been placed close to the sidewalk to allow for an ascetically pleasing and safe environment for pedestrian foot traffic. More recently, parking lots have been placed in between the sidewalk and storefronts to make room for vehicles (see Figure 7).

Figure 7 Commercial Parking Lot

Pedestrian crosswalks such as the one shown in Figure 8 are a very inexpensive way to indicate to vehicles that pedestrians are present.

Figure 8 Pedestrian Crosswalks

East Aurora has many pedestrian amenities such as park benches, planters, and pedestrian signals (see Figure 9) disbursed throughout the community to make for a pedestrian friendly environment.

Figure 9 Pedestrian Amenities

To protect the safety of students at the Main Street Elementary School, North Grove Street in the Village of East Aurora changes from a two-way to a one-way street during specified hours (see Figure 10). Crossing guards aid the children in crossing safely as many walk to the Boys and Girls Club on Paine Street after school.

Figure 10 Main and North Grove Streets The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 4

3. EXISTING CONDITIONS 3.1 Traffic Volumes Functional classification represents the hierarchy of the highway system. Highways have two main functions: to provide mobility and to provide land access. Interstates and Expressways provide a high degree of mobility, with access provided only at spaced interchanges to promote the high-speed, highvolume characteristics of the facility type. These facilities are generally in “better” condition surfacewise since they carry a high percentage of the region’s vehicle miles of travel (VMT).

As the functional classification of the particular facility drops from Interstate to Principal Arterial, Minor Arterial, Collector and then Local; so does the corresponding importance of a particular facility type; along with its VMT; and in this region’s case the road scores also tend to decrease by functional classification.

Figure 11 is a map of the functional classifications of federal aid eligible highways in the Village of East Aurora. The urban boundary represented by the black dashed line differentiates the urban and rural highways. Table 1 lists all of these roads along with several non-federal aid (NFA) roads in the study area. This table also lists the latest traffic count along with the latest surface score for the given segment.

For this study several new traffic volume counts were taken at various points around the Village of East Aurora. Figure 12 details the average daily (weekday) traffic volumes in the Village.

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 5

Village of East Aurora – Functional Classification Figure 11

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 7

Village of East Aurora – Average Daily Traffic Volumes Figure 12

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 8

RT. 20A/16/78 MAIN STREET The highest traffic volumes in the village are on Rt. 20A/16/78 Main Street. This state-touring route tends to carry the majority of traffic traveling through the area. Main Street (see Figure 13) carries between 15,500 and 16,400 vehicles per day.

Church

15,500 AADT

Typical Capacity of a 3 Lane Section: 20,650 vehicles per day

Figure 13 Rt. 20A QUAKER ROAD/ HAMBURG STREET Rt. 20A Quaker Road/Hamburg Street (see Figure 14) also has one of the highest traffic volumes, averaging between 12,600 and 13,400 vehicles a day. Buffalo Street (Rt. 16/78) just north of the traffic circle has an average daily traffic total of about 9,500.

Rt 20A Boies Alley 13,400 AADT Typical Capacity of a 2 Lane Section: 16,250 vehicles per day

Figure 14

Center

Shearer

16,400 AADT

Figure 15

MAPLE STREET AND CENTER STREET There are a few County and Locally owned roads that also carry high volumes of traffic. Maple Street and Center Street are major north-south routes through the village as seen in Figure 12. With Maple Street being an exit off the Aurora Expressway it lends itself easily to being a high volume traffic corridor ending at Main Street.

Center Street (see Figure 15) begins on the south side of Main Street a few hundred feet west of where Maple Street ends. Together these two roads create a high volume north-south traffic corridor through the village, with over 5,000 vehicles per day each.

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 9

OAKWOOD AVENUE Oakwood Avenue is another high volume local road through the Village that carries over 5,000 vehicles per day. This street is a significant east-west thoroughfare through the Village. Grey Street is another local road (see Figure 16) that has an appreciably high traffic volume. Between Boies Alley and Knox Road the average daily volume is almost 7,000 vehicles. Much of this can be attributed to the new Tops plaza, which has generated a great deal of new traffic in that area.

Grey

RT 20A

12,600 AADT

The Traffic Circle Figure 16 The traffic circle (Figure 17) at the west end of Main Street in the Village of East Aurora is one of the busier intersections in the village. An intersection turning movement count (TMC) was completed there in May 2002. The TMC was carried out for the morning peak hour, the midday peak hour and the evening peak hour for a total of eight hours. The eight-hour total traffic volume through the circle was almost 14,000 vehicles. There were four approaches considered for this site, the three main roads that enter the circle and the McDonald’s driveway. The four survey technicians used to count this location were each assigned one of the approaches. They then recorded the direction that each vehicle entered and exited the traffic circle.

Table 2 shows the breakdown of the traffic entering and exiting the traffic circle throughout the day for each of the approaches counted.

Table 2 APPROACH 8 HOUR Rt. 16/78 Buffalo Rd. Rt. 16/20A/78 Main St. Rt. 20A Hamburg St. McDonald's Driveway AM PEAK Rt. 16/78 Buffalo Rd. Rt. 16/20A/78 Main St. Rt. 20A Hamburg St. McDonald's Driveway MD PEAK Rt. 16/78 Buffalo Rd. Rt. 16/20A/78 Main St. Rt. 20A Hamburg St. McDonald's Driveway PM PEAK Rt. 16/78 Buffalo Rd. Rt. 16/20A/78 Main St. Rt. 20A Hamburg St. McDonald's Driveway

ENTER

EXIT

TOTAL

3647 4708 4864 485

3671 5399 3848 390

7318 10107 8712 875

302 519 647 68

512 529 384 55

814 1048 1031 123

544 588 679 98

538 723 514 67

1082 1311 1193 165

602 729 681 51

496 857 621 38

1098 1586 1302 89

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 10

The majority of traffic entering the circle comes from the Rt. 20A Hamburg Street approach, and then exits the circle onto Main Street. This is most likely due to the high volume of traffic triggered by the new Tops supermarket on Grey Street. There are several private driveways that also affect the traffic volume entering the traffic circle.

The McDonald’s driveway was the only one counted, but the driveway for the Kwik-Fill gas station also enters directly into the circle.

The old Tops parking lot has a driveway just before the circle on Main Street and the Laundromat on the far end of that parking lot has an entrance just after the circle. However, since the relocation of Tops there has been very little activity through these driveways.

Because of the high volume of traffic on theses roads, left turns out of unsignalized side streets and driveways can be very difficult, therefore drivers are required to The Circle make right turns only that will lead them into Figure 17 the traffic circle. Knox Road ends at Rt. 16/78 Buffalo Road a few hundred feet outside the traffic circle. Here again the traffic is required to turn right forcing the vehicles to enter the traffic circle. Much of this traffic may also be coming from the new Tops location. Burger King and Tim Horton’s each have driveways that exit onto Rt. 20A Hamburg Street that require drivers to turn right only. This action directs these vehicles into the traffic circle, as well.

There are various contributing factors influencing the amount of traffic utilizing the traffic circle. But much of the increase in traffic can be attributed to the expansion of retail development at that end of the village.

3.2 Traffic Growth VEHICLE MILES OF TRAVEL (VMT) GROWTH IN EAST AURORA AND AURORA

300,000 250,000 236,561 238,274 242,658 200,000 VMT

Overall the vehicle miles of travel (VMT) in East Aurora and Aurora have steadily increased over the last two decades.

Figure 18 shows graphically the historical trend of the VMT. In 1980 the VMT was 175,983. It has since increased to 242,658 for 2002, thereby generating a growth rate of 1.7%. Some of the roads in the town and village have shown a significant increase in growth rate, while others are still less than the overall average growth rate for the area. Route 20A Quaker Road/Hamburg Street from

150,000

193,928 208,212

218,499

175,983

100,000 GROWTH RATE = 1.7%

50,000 0 1980

1983

1986

1990

1994

1998

2002

YEAR

Figure 18 The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 11

Jewett-Holmwood Road to the traffic circle has an overall growth rate in excess of 5.6%. The Aurora Expressway (Rt. 400) also has a higher than average growth rate. Main Street (Rt. 20A/16/78) has shown a less than average growth rate overall, but from 1998 to 2002 there was a slightly higher than average growth rate.

In 2000 and 2002 an intersection turning movement counts were completed at the traffic circle at the west end of the village. A comparison of the two different counts showed an increase in traffic by 11% over the two-year period. This increase could possibly be attributed to the opening of the new Tops Supermarket on Grey Street in December 2001.

3.3 Pedestrian Volumes Pedestrian crossings were recorded at all locations where intersection turning movement counts were taken. Figure 19 displays the location and number of pedestrians crossing at each intersection. Six out of the top ten locations were located on Main Street, as presented in Table 3. Main Street at North and South Grove Streets was the busiest location with 345 pedestrians over eight hours. This was most likely due to the fact that the Main Street Elementary School is located at that corner.

Main Street at Paine Street and Whaley Avenue was the second busiest intersection for pedestrian crossings 293 for eight hours. While not all of the top ten intersections for pedestrian crossings were the busiest for vehicular traffic, all six of the Main Street intersections were in the top ten Figure 19 for the busiest eight hours of vehicular traffic. Oakwood Avenue at Paine Street was third busiest for pedestrian crossings at 218 over eight hours, but only 28th for vehicular traffic.

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 12

Table 3 INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT VEHICLE & PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS 8-HOUR TOTALS

STREET 1 MAIN ST. MAIN ST. OAKWOOD AV. MAIN ST. MAIN ST. CENTER ST. PINE ST. MAIN ST. OLEAN ST. MAIN ST. CENTER ST. CENTER ST. OLEAN RD. HAMBURG ST. HAMBURG ST. PARKDALE AV. BUFFALO RD. HAMBURG ST. BUFFALO RD. GREY ST. OAKWOOD AV. ELLICOTT RD./DAVIS RD. CENTER ST. CENTER ST. BEECH RD. BIG TREE RD. QUAKER RD. HAMBURG ST. GREY ST. GIRARD ST. BIG TREE RD. BIG TREE RD. GIRDLE RD. MAPLE ST. CENTER ST.

& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & &

STREET 2 N.&S. GROVE ST. PAINE ST./WHALEY AV. PAINE ST. OLEAN ST./PINE ST. CENTERST./SHEARER AV. OAKWOOD AV. GIRARD AV./LAWRENCE ST. RILEY ST./ELM ST. OAKWOOD AV. MAPLE ST. SOUTH ST. CAZENOVIA ST. SOUTH ST. BUFFALO RD./MAIN ST. DOUGLAS LN. SHEARER AV. GIRARD AV. OAKWOOD AV. KNOX RD. BOIES ALLEY WILLOW ST. DAVIS RD./SNYDER RD. BEECH RD. SWEET RD. MILL RD. DAVIS RD. GREY ST. MILL RD. KNOX RD. MAPLE ST. RT. 400 NB ON RAMP RT. 400 SB OFF RAMP E AURORA-PORTERVILLE RD. PARKDALE AV. BLAKELY CORNERS RD.

8 HOUR TOTAL VEHICLES 9871 8925 3401 9482 11262 5774 4307 9867 5781 10575 4399 3388 5637 13704 10577 1198 6234 10970 8837 4664 4072 4281 4173 3041 2291 4970 8779 8619 4085 6952 6348 5011 3019 2956 2593

8 HOUR TOTAL PEDS 345 293 218 185 141 118 99 88 84 79 74 60 56 54 52 39 32 30 29 25 21 17 16 16 13 7 5 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0

3.4 Capacity Analysis Level of Service measures qualitatively the operating characteristics of various types of roadways. Six levels of service are defined for each type of facility for which analysis procedures are available. They are given letter designations, from A to F, with level of service (LOS) A representing the best operating conditions and LOS F the worst (gridlock).

Currently, the GBNRTC defines a highway as deficient when its volume to capacity ratio, reaches the breakpoint between LOS D and LOS E. There is currently no level of service problems identified on any roadway segments within the Village of East Aurora.

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 13

Level of Service (LOS) Threshold Values

Freeways/Expwys 4 Lanes

Daily Capacity AADT Peak Hour Capacity LOS D - LOS E VPHPL 52,600 – 62,600 1880

Arterials 2 Lanes 3 Lanes (w/turn lane) 4 Lanes 5 Lanes (w/turn lane)

14,500 – 16,250 18,900 – 20,650 29,000 – 32,500 33,500 – 36,900

980 1240 980 1110

A thorough capacity analysis was performed on all major intersections within the Village. Currently, no signalized intersections within the Village operate at less than a level of service “C”. However, several intersections within the Village have deficient approaches at an intersection. Table 4 below indicates the major deficiencies during the AM peak hour.

Table 4 AM Peak Hr Intersection Results AM Peak Road 1 1 Buffalo 2 Main 3 Girard 4 Hamburg 5 Hamburg 6 Main 7 Buffalo 8 Ellicott 9 Main 10 Quaker 11 Quaker

@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @

Road 2 Hamburg Hamburg Maple Oakwood Douglas Grove Main Davis Willow Grey Mill

LOS – Level of Service

CONTROL Circle Circle Stop Signal Signal Signal Circle Stop Stop Stop Stop

V/C

0.63 0.59 0.54

Delay 65.2 58.9 22.5 13.9 12.7 9.0 7.5 6.9 4.3 1.8

V/C – Volume to Capacity Ratio

ICU LOS 90.3% 97.9% 76.2% C 84.5% B 71.7% B 94.9% A 80.6% 34.4% 66.9% 43.9%

ICU LOS E E C D C E D A B A H

Failing Approach NB WBR SBL NWL SEL SBR EBL NB, SB SWL NB

ICU – Intersection Capacity Utilization

Table 5 indicates the major intersection deficiencies during the PM peak hour. The unsignalized intersection of Girard and Maple (four-way Stop) currently fails for several 15-minute intervals during the PM peak.

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 14

Table 5 PM Peak Hr Intersection Results PM Peak Road 1 1 Buffalo 2 Main 3 Buffalo 4 Girard 5 Main 6 Hamburg 7 Main 8 Main 9 Main 10 Hamburg 11 Oakwood 12 Quaker 13 Main 14 Main 15 Quaker 16 Quaker 17 Main 18 Buffalo 19 Main 20 Main

@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @

Road 2 CONTROL Hamburg Circle Hamburg Circle Main Circle Maple Stop Rt. 400 SB Stop Oakwood Signal Pine Signal Riley Signal Willow Stop Douglas Signal Olean Stop Gypsy Stop Grove Signal Maple Signal Grey Stop Mill Stop Shearer Signal Girard Stop Hamlin Stop Whaley Stop

LOS – Level of Service

V/C

0.83 0.76 0.69 0.85

0.64 0.66

0.66

Delay 195.9 189.3 136.1 63.9 26.1 23.8 23.0 22.8 21.8 20.2 14.0 10.0 9.8 9.6 9.2 8.4 7.7 5.4 2.1 1.7

V/C – Volume to Capacity Ratio

ICU LOS 121.3% 130.4% 110.7% 97.8% F 61.8% 115.0% C 85.1% C 83.6% C 107.2% 101.5% C 75.8% 103.5% 95.5% A 88.0% A 56.4% 95.0% 49.4% 108.0% 94.0%

A

ICU LOS H H G E B G D D F F C F E D A H E A F E

Failing Lane NBR WBR SBR WB, SB SBL NWL SB NB, SB NB, SB SEL EB SE

SWL NB SW SB

ICU – Intersection Capacity Utilization

Figure 20 shows where all the manual intersection turning movement counts were conducted in the Village.

All intersection analysis and modeling was conducted using the software package called Synchro.

Synchro implements the methods of the latest Highway Capacity Manual and provides an easy to use solution for single intersection capacity analysis and signal timing optimization.

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 15

Village of East Aurora – Intersection Turning Count Movement Figure 20

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 16

Main Street @ Pine/Olean (Figure 21) – The southbound approach to the intersection fails during the PM peak hour. There is no opportunity for widening. Signal needs to be retimed.

M ain at Pine/Olean

Figure 21

Hamburg @ Oakwood (Figure 22) – The westbound approach to the intersection operates at a poor level of service during the PM peak hour. There is no opportunity for widening. Signal needs to be retimed along with updated lane markings to channel traffic better.

Oakwood at Hamburg

Figure 22

Hamburg Route 20A @ Mill (Figure 23) – The northbound approach – Mill Street operates at a poor level of service during the PM peak hour. It is extremely difficult to make a left-hand turn onto Rt. 20A. Mill Street comes into Hamburg at a very skewed angle. Opportunity exists to possibly realign Mill Street with Grey Street to create a new traffic circle. Lane markings to channel traffic better with a possible addition of a center turn.

Mill

Figure 23

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 17

3.5 Accident Analysis Town of Aurora Local Highway Accident History & Analysis The GBNRTC performed traffic safety analyses for local roadway segments and intersections where the required data was available. The traffic information used for this purpose coincided with the time period of the most recently summarized collision data: 10/1/96 – 9/30/99. The accident information pertained to events recorded by the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles (NYSDMV) that occurred off of the New York State highway System. The Centralized Local Accident Surveillance System (CLASS) was used to geographically locate incidents on local linear road sections or intersections. Table 6 is a summary of the analyses results for linear road sections. Table 7 contains the analysis results for intersections. These road sections and intersections are geographically illustrated in Figure 24.

Road Sections A total of 229 accidents were reported to have occurred on local/off-state linear roadway sections in the town. Of these, 136 were distributed to the road segments listed in Table 6. The remaining 93 were distributed throughout local roadway links for which no traffic data is available. Forty-one of the 229 accidents (18%) were classified as “non-reportable” property damage only: no injuries and less than $1000 damage. Seventy-seven of the remaining 188 “reportable” accidents involved either an injury or fatality. A total of 109 injuries and 2 fatalities were recorded on local linear road segments in the town. According to the analyzed CLASS data none of the segments listed in Table 6 satisfy the minimum requirements used by New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) to designate a roadway location on the state highway system as a priority for further investigation. The safety investigation criterion is stated below.

The number and percentage of accident and collision types recorded along local linear road over the three-year analysis period are detailed in Tables 8 and 9.

Table 8 Town of Aurora Local Roadway Accident Type Summary 10/1/96 - 9/30/99 Collision with Motor vehicle 91 48% Collision with Animal 35 19% Collision with Tree 14 7% Collision with Snow Embankment 14 7% Collision with Pedestrian 7 4% Collision with Light Support/Utility Pole 6 3% Collision with Fixed Object 5 3% Collision with Sign Post 3 2% Overturned 3 2% Collision with Bicyclist 2 1% Collision with Guide Rail 2 1% Collision with Building/wall 1 1% Collision with Bridge Structure 1 1% Collision with Culvert/Head wall 1 1% Collision with Fire Hydrant 1 1% Ran Off Road 1 1% Other (non-collision) 1 1% Grand Total 188 100% The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 18

Table 6 Accident Analysis Summary – Linear Road Sections Percent Difference

Name

144% EMERY RD

Route Segment CENTER ST TO OLEAN RT 16

AADT

Total Average Calculated Accidents Accident Rate Accident Rate Jurisdiction

Length

900

2.52

12

1.98

4.83 NFA

71% BLAKELEY CORNERS RD

CENTER ST TO OLEAN RD

1,000

1.89

7

1.98

3.38 NFA

70% OAKWOOD AV

SAVAGE ST TO ELM ST

5,055

0.05

1

2.12

3.61 NFA

RT 20A HANBURG ST TO S WILLOW ST

5,937

0.21

3

2.12

2.20 NFA

-2% JEWETT HOLMWOOD RD

DAVIS RD TO GROVER RD

2,500

1.50

8

1.98

1.95 NFA

-3% BLAKELEY CORNERS RD -7% PINE ST

MILL RD TO CENTER ST RT 20A TO VILLAGE LN

1,500 4,400

1.27 0.42

4 4

1.98 2.12

1.92 NFA 1.98 ERIE

EMERY RD TO AURORA S TN LN SENECA TO AURORA/ELMA TN LN RT 20A TO AURORA TN LN ELMA TN LN TO KNOX

2,100 3,100 4,100 1,400

1.52 0.65 0.95 1.76

6 4 7 4

1.98 2.12 2.12 2.12

1.72 1.81 1.64 1.48

-32% JEWETT HOLMWOOD RD

RT 187 TO DAVIS RD

1,700

0.80

2

1.98

1.34 NFA

-40% MILL RD

BEECH RD TO RT 20A HAMBURG ST

4,031

0.53

3

2.12

1.28 NFA

-41% MILL RD

ELLICOTT RD (RT 240) TO SWEET RD

1,500

2.62

5

1.98

1.16 NFA

-42% -51% -53% -55%

E AUR-PRTVLLE RD TO ELMA/AURORA TN LN BEECH TO RT 20A BOWEN TO ELMA/AURORA TN LN SWEET TO BEECH

3,400 4,300 6,000 3,900

0.66 0.82 0.77 1.30

3 4 5 5

2.12 2.12 2.12 1.98

1.22 1.04 0.99 0.90

-62% JEWETT HOLMWOOD RD -65% BUFFALO ST(16/78)

GROVER RD TO 20A RT 20A TO BOWEN

2,900 8,700

0.83 0.57

2 4

1.98 2.12

0.76 NFA 0.74 ERIE

-65% DAVIS RD -70% CENTER ST

RT 240 TO 20A EMERY TO SWEET

2,200 3,100

2.38 1.50

4 3

1.98 1.98

0.70 NFA 0.59 ERIE

-72% MILL RD

SWEET RD TO BEECH RD

2,200

1.52

2

1.98

0.55 NFA

-84% BUFFALO ST 16/78

GIRARD AV TO KNOX RD

9,451

0.29

1

2.12

0.33 ERIE

CENTER ST

LINDEN AV TO CAZENOVIA ST

5,937

0.16

2.12

ERIE

GIRARD AV KNOX RD KNOX RD

N WILLOW ST TO MAPLE ST WILLARDSHIRE TO E AUR VIL LN E AUR VIL LN TO RTS 16/78

3,208 900 1,400

0.24 1.62 0.38

2.12 2.12 2.12

NFA ERIE ERIE

MAPLE ST

FILLMORE AV TO PARKDALE AV

5,492

0.10

2.12

ERIE

PINE ST TRANSIT RD

WARREN DR TO GIRARD AV JEWETT-HOLMWOOD TO RT 20A

5,017 3,800

0.16 1.09

2.12 2.12

ERIE ERIE

4% OAKWOOD AV

-13% -15% -23% -30%

CENTER ST BOWEN RD MAPLE ST WILLARDSHIRE RD

GIRDLE RD CENTER ST BUFFALO ST(16/78) CENTER ST

NFA ERIE ERIE ERIE

ERIE ERIE ERIE ERIE

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 19

Table 7 Accident Analysis Summary - Intersections Percent Difference 578% 550% 289% 261% 226% 207% 206% 156% 152% 133% 106% 89% 54% 52% 49% 29% 22% 17% 14% 11% 11% 11% 11% 6% 6% 6% -6% -25% -37% -39% -39% -39% -40% -44% -44% -48% -48% -50% -59% -63% -66% -67% -67% -78% -83% -86% -86%

Intersecting Streets BLAKELEY CORNERS RD PARKDALE AVE BAILEY RD GYPSY LA MILL RD CENTER ST KNOX RD GROVER RD DAVIS RD SENECA ST OLEAN ST DAVIS RD CENTER ST MILL RD CENTER ST ELM ST E AURORA PORTERVILLE RD GROVER RD EMERY RD CENTER ST MAPLE ST MILL ST FAIRLAWN DR CENTER ST CENTER ST GREY ST MAIN ST CENTER ST / SHEARER AVE MAIN ST MAIN ST MAPLE ST HILLCREST AVE NORTH ST KNOX RD BOWEN RD BLAKELEY CORNERS RD CENTER ST BUFFALO RD CHURCH ST MAIN ST MAIN ST MAIN ST HAMLIN AVE BUFFALO RD MAIN ST ELM ST / RILEY ST N WILLOW ST / S WILLOW ST

MILL RD SHEARER AVE CENTER ST KNOX RD WEST FALLS RD EMERY RD WILLARD SHIRE RD MILL RD JEWITT HOLMWOOD RD WILLARD SHIRE RD PORTERVILLE RD SNYDER RD OAKWOOD AVE SWEET RD PROSPECT AVE OAKWOOD AVE GIRDLE RD JEWITT HOLMWOOD RD LEWIS RD / UNDERHILL RD CAZENOVIA ST GIRARD AVE WOODBROOK DR MILL ST LINDEN AVE LEGION DR BOISE ALLEY PARK PL MAIN ST PAINE ST TEMPLE PL PARKDALE AVE MAPLE RD MAPLE ST BUFFALO RD BUFFALO RD CENTER ST SWEET RD GIRARD AVE MAIN ST N GROVE ST / S GROVE ST MAPLE ST WALNUT ST MAIN ST ERNST PL WHALEY ST MAIN ST MAIN ST

Accident Count 3 2 2 1 3 5 1 1 5 3 2 1 5 2 3 2 1 2 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 5 3 11 4 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 5 3 1 1 1 1 2 1

Leg 1 AADT 1500 1 2100 1 1 3100 1 1 2200 6000 1000 2200 4300 2200 4300 1000 3400 1000 1000 4300 7800 4031 4050 4300 4300 5348 1 876 1 1 7800 7800 7800 8700 6000 3100 3900 8700 430 645 7800 1 1000 8700 928 1831 1000

Leg 2 AADT 1500 1298 1000 900 1500 900 1000 1500 2500 1 4400 1000 3934 1000 1000 1000 1442 2900 900 1 4651 1000 1000 1000 1 566 16100 16100 16100 16100 1 1 1000 1 3100 698 203 2033 16100 16100 16100 16100 16100 16100 16100 16100 16100

Leg 3 AADT 1500 1108 2100 1000 1000 2100 900 1000 2200 6000 4400 2200 4300 1500 4300 1000 1 1000 1000 4300 7800 4031 4050 4300 4300 3001 1000 4300 898 1000 7800 7800 7800 8700 8700 3100 3100 8700 1 1040 1 1000 1 16100 1 1479 1000

Leg 4 AADT 1 702 1 900 1500 1000 1400 1500 1700 1000 1 1 4263 1000 1000 5055 3400 2500 900 680 3200 1 1 1 1000 3130 16100 16100 16100 16100 1216 1000 1000 1400 1 1235 1008 1 16100 16100 16100 16100 16100 1 16100 16100 16100

Calculated Accident rate 1.22 1.17 0.70 0.65 1.37 1.29 0.55 0.46 1.06 0.42 0.37 0.34 0.54 0.64 0.52 0.45 0.22 0.49 0.48 0.20 0.39 0.20 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.76 0.17 0.54 0.22 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.21 0.10 0.10 0.22 0.22 0.09 0.17 0.27 0.14 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.06 0.10 0.05

NYS Average Accident rate 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.42 0.42 0.18 0.18 0.42 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.35 0.42 0.35 0.35 0.18 0.42 0.42 0.18 0.35 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.72 0.18 0.72 0.35 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.35 0.18 0.18 0.42 0.42 0.18 0.41 0.72 0.41 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.35 0.72 0.35

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 20

Local Highway Accident History Analysis Figure 24

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 21

New York State Accident History/Analysis Figure 25

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 22

Table 9 Town of Aurora Local Roadway Collision Type Summary 10/1/96 - 9/30/99 Other Rear End Right Angle Overtaking Not reported Head On Left Turn (against other car) Sideswipe Left Turn (with other car) Right Turn (against other car) Right Turn (with other car) Grand Total

106 18 15 14 10 9 7 6 1 1 1 188

56% 10% 8% 7% 5% 5% 4% 3% 1% 1% 1% 100%

Intersections A total of 124 accidents were reported to have occurred at local/off-state intersections in the town. Of these, 107 were distributed to intersections with calculable accident rates listed in Table 7. The remaining 17 were distributed throughout local intersections for which no traffic data is available.

Twenty-three of the 124 accidents (19%) were classified as “non-reportable” property damage only: no injuries and less than $1000 damage. Forty-three of the remaining 101 “reportable” accidents involved an injury. A total of 65 injuries and no fatalities were recorded at local intersections in the town. According to the analyzed CLASS data none of the intersections listed in Table 7 satisfy the minimum requirements used by NYSDOT to designate an intersection location on state highway system as a priority for further investigation. The safety investigation criterion is stated below.

The number and percentage of accident and collision types recorded at local intersections over the three-year analysis period are detailed in Tables 10 and 11.

Table 10 Town of Aurora Local Intersection Accident Type Summary 10/1/96 - 9/30/99 Collision with Motor vehicle 84 Collision with Pedestrian 1 Collision with Bicyclist 3 Collision with Animal 2 Collision with Light Support/Utility Pole 2 Collision with Sign Post 1 Collision with Tree 3 Collision with Curbing 1 Collision with Earth (rock cut, ditch) 2 Other (non-collision) 1 Not Reported 1 Grand Total 101

83% 1% 3% 2% 2% 1% 3% 1% 2% 1% 1% 100%

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 23

Table 11 Town of Aurora Local Intersection Collision Type Summary 10/1/96 - 9/30/99 Right Angle 44 Other 20 Rear End 19 Left Turn (against other car) 8 Not reported 3 Overtaking 2 Sideswipe 2 Left Turn (with other car) 1 Right Turn (against other car) 1 Right Turn (with other car) 1 Grand Total 101

44% 20% 19% 8% 3% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 100%

Town of Aurora New York State Highway Accident History & Analysis The NYSDOT used the State Safety Information Management System (SIMS) to examine all NYS road segments and intersections within the town. The most recent traffic and collision data available for this purpose covers the two-year period of 1/1/99 to 12/31/00. The accident information pertained to events recorded by the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles (NYSDMV) that occurred on the New York State highway system.

NYSDOT used SIMS to detect one location with unexpectedly high accident experience and unusual accident patterns. The location had an accident rate significantly in excess of the mean rate for comparable facilities on the New York State highway system. Statistical monitoring of the accident activity at this location has indicated that there is a strong likelihood some factor(s) other than randomness has contributed to the activity. This location, and other similar locations in the region, is subject to prioritization for further investigation based on accident severities, accident rate reduction targets, and costs. Linear locations such as this usually have a length of .30 mile or greater.

Additional thresholds for numbers of accidents and statistical confidence level apply as follows: SAFETY INVESTIGATION CRITERION Facility Type # of Accidents Confidence Level rural highway segments 12 accidents/2years 99.9% urban highway segments 20 accidents/2 years 99.9% rural intersections 6 accidents/1 year 99.9% urban intersections 10 accidents/1 year 99.9% These general guidelines are typically used as a tool to help plan work programs, concentrate efforts, and focus on locations when scoping capital projects. Other sources for potential study locations also exist.

According to the analyzed data the location within the study area that met the above criterion is located on NYS Route 20A within the Village of East Aurora, where it is known as Hamburg Street, from the vicinity of Boise Alley to the vicinity of traffic circle/junction NYS Route 16/78. This The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 24

location is geographically illustrated in Figure 25. summarized below: AADT 12,833

The roadway, traffic, and accident data is

Length # of Accidents Calculated Accident Rate .30 mile 22 2.814

Reference Marker Range 20A53011095 – 20A53011097

Eighteen of the accidents at this location (81%) resulted in property damage only. The remaining four accidents involved injuries and no accidents involved fatalities.

The NYSDOT also used SIMS to detect highway segments whose accident rate exceeded the comparable statewide mean rate, but at a lower confidence level. Thresholds for this tier of potentially safety deficient locations are as follows: SAFETY DEFICIENT CRITERION Facility Type # of Accidents rural highway segments 6 accidents/2years urban highway segments 6 accidents/2 years

Confidence Level 90.0% 90.0%

According to the analyzed data seven NYS highway locations within the study area met the above criterion. These locations are listed in Table 12. Part of the location on Route 20A falls within the section of Hamburg Street noted above. A total of 62 accidents were recorded on these segments.

Forty-five (72%) resulted in property damage only. The remaining seventeen accidents involved injuries and no accidents involved fatalities.

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 25

Table 12 Town of Aurora Potential Safety Deficient NYS Highway Segments

NYS ROUTE NO(s).

16 16 16/400

ROAD NAME

SEGMENT LIMITS (reference marker range)

.15 ml E of WALES / AURORA TN LN to .15 ml W of WALES / AURORA OLEAN RD TN LN OLEAN RD .15 ml N of LAPHAM RD to VILLAGE LN AURORA .30 ml portion of section between CAZENOVIA CREEK and BLAKELY RD EXPWY

20A

HAMBURG .15 ml W of MILL RD to .15 ml E of MILL RD ST

240 241

DAVIS RD DAVIS RD

.50 ml portion of section between COLDEN / AURORA LN and BEHM RD .30 ml portion of section between TANNERY RD and MILL RD

400

AURORA EXPWY

.40 ml portion of section between RT 20A and ELMA / AURORA TN LN

NO. ACCS.

CALCULATE D ACCIDENT RATE

12,994 0.30 5,420 0.30

13 7

2.850 1.189

10,722 0.30

6

2.351

12,833 0.30

16

2.814

2,791 0.50 3,256 0.30

6 6

1.02 0.714

12,343 0.40

8

3.609

AADT

LGT H.

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 26

3.6 Facility Conditions Pavement The roadway surface conditions were updated for all the main highways in the Village. The pavement condition survey was conducted in late August of 2002 and was based upon visual scoring procedures developed and used by the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT).

The surface condition rating reflects the extent of scaling, cracking, patching, raveling, and faulting.

The rating of these measures are based upon a one to ten scale, where one represents the “poorest” roadway condition, and ten the “best” roadway condition. Figure 26 details the generalized verbal descriptions for surface score conditions.

Pavement scores above a six are considered a satisfactory pavement condition. A score of six (fair) denotes minor deterioration, which is expected to need attention in the near future. Surface scores of five and below indicate conditions that should be corrected immediately to prevent further deterioration and the need for complete reconstruction at a much higher cost.

Table 13 is a summary of the pavement conditions as of August 2002. Listed are the different route segments throughout the Town and Village that were studied. The latest traffic count and surface score are listed for each segment. The road segments in Table 13 are listed according to the lowest surface score and the greatest traffic volume.

Segments with road scores of 5 or less with traffic volumes of 3,000 or more include: -

Transit Rd. from Jewett-Holmwood Rd. to Rt. 20A Quaker Rd. Center St. from Sweet Rd. to Beech Rd. Center St. from Emery Rd. to Sweet Rd. Maple St. from the Aurora Town Line to West Blood Rd. Jewtt-Holmwood Rd. from Freemen Rd. to Transit Rd. Extension Milestrip Rd. from Rt. 240/277 Buffalo Rd. to Transit Rd

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 27

Figure 26 Generalized Verbal Descriptions of Conditioned Rating Scores for Roadway Surface Scores

General Score Condition

10 Excellent 9 Excellent

8 Good

7 Good

6 Fair

5 Poor

4 Poor

3 Poor

2 Poor 1 Poor

Condition Rating Description Surface

There are no visual derivations from a smooth surface. Pavement recently constructed, reconstructed, or overlaid within the last years.

Pavement should have no cracks or patches. Flexible pavement recently resurfaced within the past year or two. Overlay pavements may show evidence of some hairline reflection cracking. Rigid pavement joints function properly.

Pavements give an excellent ride but show infrequent to occasional signs of surface deterioration. Flexible pavements begin to show very slight evidence of raveling, cracking, and wheel track wear. Rigid pavements begin to show very slight evidence of surface deterioration such as cracking, joint spalling, or scaling. Overlay pavements show evidence of very slight reflection cracking.

Pavements give a good ride but show infrequent to occasional signs of surface deterioration. Flexible pavements show evidence of slight rutting, random cracking and some raveling. Rigid pavements show evidence of slight joint spalling, scaling, or minor cracking. Overlay pavements show evidence of slight reflection cracking and multiple cracking at reflection cracks.

Riding quality is noticeably inferior to new pavements, showing infrequent to occasional signs of distress. Surface defects of flexible pavements may include moderate rutting, cracking, and raveling: patching is apparent. Overlay pavements show evidence of slight to moderate cracking and raveling along cracks.

Riding quality is noticeably inferior to new pavements but may be tolerable for high speed traffic. Pavements show occasional to frequent signs of distress. Surface defects of pavements are the same as under the 6 rating but are more severe.

Pavements have deteriorated to a point where resurfacing is required, showing occasional to frequent distress. Rideability, even at slow speeds, is impaired. Surface defects on flexible pavements include sever rutting, cracking, raveling, and patching. Surface defects of rigid pavements include severe joint spalling, cracking, scaling and patching.

Overlay pavements show evidence of severe surface delamination.

Pavements have deteriorated to a point where resurfacing is required immediately.

Flexible pavements show evidence of severe and frequent scaling, joint spalling, faulting cracking, and patching. Rigid pavements show signs of frequent and severe joint spalling, cracking and scaling.

Pavements are in extremely deteriorated condition and may require complete reconstruction.

Motorists experience discomfort and travel speeds will decrease.

Pavements are in extremely deteriorated condition and are in need of immediate corrective action. There facilities are considered impassable at posted speeds.

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 28

Table 13 Summary of Pavement Conditions 2002 Village of East Aurora and Town of Aurora

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 29

Summary of Pavement Conditions 2002 Village of East Aurora and Town of Aurora

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 30

Village of East Aurora – Pavement Conditions Figure 27

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 31

4. EAST AURORA PARKING STUDY 4.1 Introduction A thorough parking inventory was taken throughout the 34-block study area along Main Street in the Village of East Aurora. This inventory determined that there are 6,583 parking spaces within the study area (see Figure 28). Every attempt was made to be as accurate as possible, however, due to the fact that many on street and off street parking spaces are not marked, this survey represents a good estimation of parking available.

Despite comments and perceptions to the contrary, parking availability does not appear to be a problem in East Aurora at the present time.

•

Peak hour parking occupancy for most on and off street locations ranges from 5-70%. This is an acceptable range and demonstrates that there is ample existing parking in East Aurora.

•

For a few key areas, such as the Grey Street Plaza, and on-street parking on Main Street between Grove Street and Olean/Pine Streets, peak hour parking occupancy is at capacity (8595%).

However, ample parking exists nearby along Main Street, leading to the conclusion that adjacent streets can meet any additional parking needs. The capacity of the Grey Street Plaza is more difficult as opportunities for neighborhood spillover is minimal. Yet the peak hour occupancy is maintained for only a short period of time on a Saturday, meaning for the majority of the time, the Plaza adequately handles its parking needs.

•

On street parking duration is short, with 88% of all cars parked for two hours or less. This indicates that Main Street and nearby streets are used for shopping, dining, and visitor parking, as opposed to residential or business parking.

•

The severely deteriorated curbs along Main Street and nearby streets often leads to undefined driveways and curb cuts, causing confusion, potential accident points, and reducing the amount of on street parking.

•

Part of the reason East Aurora functions so well is in part to its traditional town design, especially in the downtown area. Business buildings come up to the sidewalk, encouraging walkability and pedestrian use, thereby reducing the amount of multiple car trips. Residents and visitors alike are apt to park in the lots behind Main Street and walk to several destinations.

Table 14 summarizes the total number of on street and off street parking spaces available in the study area.

Subsequent to the inventory, parking analysis was conducted on several key blocks within the 34block study area. On Street parking accumulation and duration was calculated for blocks 3-9, 11-12, 17-18, 20-25, 28, and 30. Off street accumulation was calculated for blocks 3, 6, 11, 17-18, and 33.

The choice of these blocks represent the highest use areas within the study area, as well as important municipal or community parking areas (such as the public lots along Millard Fillmore Place and the Grey Street plaza lot.)

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 32

East Aurora is a traditional American small town that retains many desirable attributes. These include things like walkable streets, pedestrian friendly neighborhoods, and mixed-use, pedestrian based retail.

These attributes are so desirable that they are often sought after and included in new developments around the country.

In particular, parking and vehicular movement is generally balanced with the needs of the pedestrian in East Aurora. The main downtown business blocks, Main Street between Elm/Riley and Olean/Pine exhibit the traditional model of retail development where stores and businesses come up to the sidewalk. This makes the street pleasant and attractive to pedestrians, thus encouraging pedestrian use. Parking is to the rear of the buildings where it is still easily accessible but does not dominate the landscape.

The area near the circle, “the west end,” is experiencing some redevelopment. It currently exhibits a mixed model of parking and access, with some street-fronting, pedestrian based businesses, and some more suburban style businesses with parking in front. Most encouraging is the new development under construction on the south side of Main Street that comes up to the sidewalk line and respects the traditional built form of East Aurora and encouraging pedestrian activity. A similar style of building is encouraged for the former Tops site on the circle. Every effort should be taken to insure that this key location on East Aurora’s widely recognized ‘circle’ be built to the sidewalk line and frame West Main Street with businesses the same way it is in the east end.

Finally, even East Aurora’s “strip” of big box stores and fast food restaurants is remarkably well integrated into the village fabric making it possible and even pleasant for a village resident to walk to the supermarket or McDonald’s. This simple act is virtually impossible in many other small towns where the big boxes are located to far out of town, or so cut off by multiple lanes of fast moving traffic as to make it extremely difficult to walk to.

Therefore, since East Aurora has so many advantages and good design attributes already, every effort should be made to build on these assets and encourage pedestrian activity.

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 33

29

33

20

28

2

24

3

4

23 22

5

21

6

19 18

8

9 10

17

11 13

16 15

14

1

Figure 28

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 34

Table 14

Table 14 The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 35

4.2 Categorization The two main categories are on street and off street parking. Those are further broken down into subcategories.

On Street •

Unrestricted parking – the majority of on street parking falls into this category.

The only restriction is the village wide parking regulation that prohibits parking from 3am to 7am from Oct. 15 to April 15.

•

Two hour parking – This is found mostly along Main Street and Oakwood Avenue and stipulates a two-hour maximum parking time between 8am and 6pm except Sundays and holidays.

•

Half-hour parking – This is found along Main Street in a small area near Village Hall. Same as two hour parking, except the maximum time is 30 minutes.

•

15 Minute parking – there are a handful of spaces on Main Street just east of Olean/Pine Streets with this designation. Unlike two hour and half hour parking, the maximum time is always 15 minutes (i.e. not just during particular hours).

•

No Parking, 7:30am to 5pm, School Days – there are a dozen spaces with this designation on Park Place near Immaculate Conception School.

•

No Parking, 8am to 4pm, School Days – there are 40 spaces with this designation, mostly along Fillmore Avenue near the Middle School.

•

Handicapped – there are three on street Handicapped spaces, all in the downtown area.

Off Street Public – there are only four blocks with public off street parking. Public parking was defined as municipally owned since all other off street parking belongs to businesses, industries, or is associated with a particular institution such as a school, a church, the library, or post office. Three of the four blocks with public off street parking are in the downtown area, and the fourth is near the circle.

Private – all off street parking that is not municipally owned were categorized as private.

This may include parking for public institutions such as the post office, library, and schools, but since that parking is intended for the use of only that institution (unlike the general, municipal parking lots) were included here.

Beyond that, private parking has varying degrees of “privateness.” Church parking lots tend to be quasi-public, as is the large lot for the plaza on Grey Street. Banks, restaurants,

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 36

professional offices, and any retail establishments that have their own parking tend to designate it for customers only, but this is included in the final count.

Also included is parking for employees of commercial and industrial establishments, such as the businesses at Commerce Green, Fisher Price, Aurora Park Nursing Home, and others. Most of this parking is for employees, but could also be used for customers or visitors to the business, therefore having a “public” element to it.

Parking used for storing work vehicles at places like the telephone company building, the post office, and the sales lots at the car dealerships were not counted. Parking areas used for any residential buildings were also not counted. Also left out of the final count were the spaces at the old Tops parking lot at the circle. It is signed “no parking” by the developer and there is little demand, at this point, for it anyway.

4.3 Parking Usage Parking Accumulation Parking usage (accumulation) was calculated for several key blocks within the study area.

On Street On Street parking accumulation was calculated for blocks 3-9, 11-12, 17-18, 20-25, 28, and 30. These are the blocks that line Main Street from the circle to Pine/Olean Streets.

Generally the parking was calculated on Main Street itself and the perpendicular side streets of the individual blocks. The ‘back’ street, parallel to Main, was only counted on blocks 17 and 18, the key “downtown” blocks that contain Vidler’s, CVS, Fleet Bank, Exquisite Taste, and a variety of small shops and businesses.

Generally, the blocks east of the library/village hall area are well used, with the peak hour occupancy of 12:30-3:00 ranging between 89% and 95% for block 12. Other blocks in the area have peak hour rates in the 65%-70% range. Yet streets like East Fillmore Ave, just one block from Main Street, are virtually empty. Farther west along Main, especially between Willow and Grove, the streets are also lightly used for on street parking, with occupancy rates ranging from 0-25%. Rates rise towards the circle, but there is still plenty of room. Any new development on the former Tops site should come up to the sidewalk to promote on street parking, with additional parking behind.

This matches the business/parking model of Main Street farther east and is the only appropriate model for the central area of a traditional small town like East Aurora.

Off Street Off Street parking accumulation was calculated for blocks 3, 6, 11, 17-18, and 33. These are generally the blocks that contain the off street public parking in the village.

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 37

Block 3 – Off street parking was counted/calculated for Tim Horton’s, Burger King, Montana Mills/Java Joes, and the municipal lot. This is why the counted total (176) is not the entire block total (211), as there were a few small lots along Main (the liquor store, 3 gas station etc.) that were not included. This lot saw very high turnover in the Burger King, 3 Tim Horton’s, and Montana Mills/Java Joe’s areas, but this was effectively averaged out by the low turnover and relatively low usage of the municipal lot.

As expected, the peak time of usage for this lot was around midday, with 47% occupied between 12:30 and 1.

Block 6 – Off street parking was counted/calculated for Town Hall and the Roycroft Center parking lots.

Again, there were a few small lots along Main (small professional offices, etc.) that were not included. Therefore the counted total (110) does not match the block total (123). This lot saw fairly high usage throughout the day, peaking at 68% between 1:30-2:00. Usage drops off sharply after 4:30 with the closing of the municipal offices and the professional offices in the Roycroft Center.

6

Block 11 – Off street parking was counted/calculated for the small public lots along Millard Fillmore Place, just south of the downtown business district. No other parking was counted in Block 11, such as the large but unused lot at the vacant business at Oakwood and Olean. Therefore, the counted total was 61, not the block total of 221. These two small lots saw 11 fairly uniform usage throughout the day, peaking at midday with 56% usage between 1:00-1:30.

The eastern lot is larger and better paved, marked, etc, so it saw far more usage and turnover than the smaller western lot. However, the western lot offers an opportunity for improvement and additional parking in the downtown area.

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 38

Blocks 17 and 18 – all off street parking was counted/calculated in these two key blocks downtown.

The off street areas on these two blocks form more or less one large continuous lot.

However, small pockets are signed for particular 17 businesses, making them, in essence, 18 private. The peak usage for these blocks occurred between 12:30-2:00 for Block 17 when 62%-67% of the parking was occupied and between 12:00-1:00 for Block 18 when 73%79% of the parking was occupied.

Block 18, especially the western park near Wilson Farms and CVS saw very high usage and turnover. Its entrances off Riley Street are too numerous and confusing and therefore potentially dangerous. They should be consolidated into one or two well marked main entrances to the lot. Block 17 has too many internal divisions that waste space and make circulation difficult. To take full advantage of this parking asset, a better organization of the lot should be considered.

Block 33 – this contains the large plaza parking lot on Grey St.- the single largest area of parking in East Aurora. Parking accumulation was calculated for a key 5-hour period on a Saturday, typically the day with the highest usage and also the day when a portion of the lot is taken over by the farmers market. A small lot along Knox Rd. was not counted, as well as the spaces used by the farmers market, so the counted 33 total is 914 rather than the block total of 971. Unlike the other off street parking areas studied, this area was surveyed on a Saturday during its peak usage hours.

Between 10:30-11:00 the lot saw its peak usage at 90%, making it virtually full. After 1:30pm, however, occupancy drops below 50%. Internal circulation in this lot is extremely poor, leading to many “near misses” and poor traffic flow. The imminent closure of Ames, one of the plaza’s main anchor stores, will affect the usage of this lot.

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 39

Parking Duration Parking turnover (duration) was calculated for several key blocks (on street parking only) within the study area. This was done by noting the last three characters on a license plate of any car parking on a given street.

On Street On Street parking duration was calculated for blocks 3-9, 11-12, 17-18, 20-25, 28, and 30.

These are the blocks that line Main Street from the circle to Pine/Olean Streets. Generally the parking was calculated on Main Street itself and the perpendicular side streets of the individual blocks. The ‘back’ street, parallel to Main, was only counted on blocks 17 and 18, the key “downtown” blocks that contain Vidler's, CVS, Fleet Bank, Exquisite Taste, and a variety of other small shops and businesses.

Although it varies somewhat by block, the vast majority of cars (88%) parked on village streets along the Main Street corridor were parked two hours or less. Only 3% were parked seven hours or more.

4.4 Potential Parking Problem Areas Southwest side of Buffalo Street from just north of Knox village line This stretch of roadway has no parking prohibitions. However, the relatively narrow pavement width and excessive speeds work against on-street parking. At present, there is little need for on-street parking in this area, however, as Knox Farm State Park becomes more widely know and/or any potential development along Girard at Buffalo, on street parking may become very desirable to help slow traffic down and characterize this as a ‘village’ street.

Knox Road from Buffalo to village line This stretch of roadway has no parking prohibitions. Yet the situation is even worse than on Buffalo Street. The narrow pavement width (approximately 20-25’) virtually prohibits on street parking. To avoid confusion and potential problems, this stretch should be adequately signed prohibiting parking. In the future, as Knox Farm State Park becomes more widely known, especially the soccer fields farther down Knox, consideration should be given to providing one lane of on street parking in this area.

Hamburg/Quaker from the circle to the village line This stretch of roadway has no parking prohibitions. Yet from the culvert just west of Grey St. to the circle, the pavement is too narrow (approx 28-30’) for on street parking. Given that this roadway was reconstructed within the past 10 years, it is mysterious as to why there are no signs prohibiting parking. These should be installed to avoid confusion and potential problems.

Farther west on Quaker, the shoulder are paved and are wide enough for parking, but there is little need for it in this area.

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 40

Willow from Parkdale to Oakwood Willow St. has no parking prohibitions on either side of the street. Currently, this does not appear to be problematic, but it is conceivable that both sides of the street could be used for a solid lane of parking, thus narrowing the traffic section to a single lane. Signs should be placed to clearly make one side of Willow the parking lane to avoid potential problems.

Shearer from Parkdale to Main Shearer Ave. has no parking prohibitions on either side of the street. Currently, this does not appear to be problematic, but it is conceivable that both sides of the street could be used for a solid lane of parking, thus narrowing the traffic section to a single lane. Signs should be placed to clearly make one side the parking lane to avoid potential problems.

Grove from Fillmore to Main Grove St. has no parking prohibitions on either side of the street. Currently, this does not appear to be problematic, but it is conceivable that both sides of the street could be used for a solid lane of parking, thus narrowing the traffic section to a single lane. This would be especially significant here, next to the Middle School. Signs should be placed to clearly make one side the parking lane to avoid potential problems.

Elm from Main to Persons Elm Street suffers from a problem that is found throughout East Aurora, although it is along Elm that is seems to be most severe/problematic. Overly large and undefined curb cuts combined with deteriorated cubs make it unclear as to what is a driveway and what is a parking spot.

Riley from Main to Girard Riley Street, particularly north of the Wilson Farms Plaza, is easily wide enough to accommodate a lane of on street parking. Currently, parking is prohibited along the entire street between Main and Girard. An on street parking lane here could accommodate overflow from the downtown area.

The entrances and exits to the plaza are confusing and redundant. There are currently four separate cub cuts/driveways to the parking area. This creates confusion for motorists and pedestrians and contributes to potentially dangerous situations. These should be consolidated into one or two clearly marked entrances.

Angle Parking on Main Street (Riley to Olean/Pine) Main Street between Riley and Olean/Pine Streets is currently 48 ft wide from curb to curb.

Parallel parking is allowed on both sides (approx. 8’), and one thru lane is striped in each direction (approx. 11’). A 10 ft center turn lane is available throughout this section.

If angle parking were to be added to this section (instead of parallel parking) it would require widening the current pavement width by a total of 12 ft. (6 ft on each side); for a total pavement width of 60 ft. Parking and design standards require 19 ft of space for angle parking, plus an 11 ft travel lane, no center turn lane, for a total width of 60 ft. In order to

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 41

maintain parking on each side with one thru-lane in each direction the center turning lane would have to be eliminated.

Thus, angle parking would not seem feasible for Main Street because of the need for additional pavement width that would be required and the loss of sidewalk/or green-space along the street.

5. TRAFFIC OPTIONS – EXISTING TRAFFIC and CIRCULATON 5.1 The Circle The existing traffic circle (see figure 29) at the intersection of Hamburg, Buffalo, and Main Streets is a widely recognized landmark in East Aurora. Despite heavy traffic, the circle functions as it should. Minor modifications that could improve the safety and functionality of the circle include eliminating or consolidating the McDonald’s and Kwik Fill driveways on the west side.

‘Curbing’ and planting the existing approach ‘wedges’ would greatly improve the aesthetics of the area, as well as greatly improve pedestrian safety. The planted wedges would act as pedestrian refuge islands for people crossing the street.

Gates Circle on Delaware Avenue, as well as the newly restored Richmond Avenue circles, have either planted or decoratively paved diverter wedges.

Figure 29

Finally, and this perhaps is a minor point, is the name of the circle itself. Officially, it is called Ernst Place, at least the western section. But it most commonly referred to as simply ‘the circle.’ This seems somewhat mundane in a community such as East Aurora that prides itself on its heritage. Perhaps the village, in collaboration with the school district, could hold a contest to name the circle. East Aurora has many notable sons and daughters who could be commemorated by naming the circle after them. This would encourage interest in local history and community involvement.

5.2 Railroad Underpasses There are four places in the village where the railroad passes over streets on bridges. These are Girard Street, Main Street, Oakwood Avenue, and Olean Street. Of the four, only Olean Street meets current clearance standards. Girard Street has a posted clearance of 12’10.” Oakwood and Main Street have extremely confusing multiple postings. On the west side of the Oakwood Ave. underpass, the posted clearance is 12’10.” On the east side

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 42

is a sign that presumably says 12’10” but partially covering it is a temporary painted plywood sign that says 13’9” (See Figure 31). The Main Street underpass has two signs, side by side (See Figure 30). One says ‘“Clearance 12’10” the other says “Actual Clearance 13’9”’. This is confusing to truck drivers and could lead to potentially dangerous situations.

Oakwood Overpass – Posted Clearance is covered with an unreadable sign

Misleading Signage on Main Street Overpass

BRICK PAVEMENT Figure 30

Figure 31

5.3 Brick Pavement To enhance the historic character of the Village uncover/reconstruct brick portion of Main Street between Elm/Riley and Olean/Pine (see Figure 32). Similar recent examples of this include Niagara Falls Blvd. in Buffalo and Main Street in the Village of Cattaraugus.

Alternatively, use bricks/pavers for distinctive crosswalks, much like Center St. in Lewiston or Main St. in Akron.

Figure 32

5.4 Grey Street Plaza The Grey Street Plaza is a major traffic generator in the village and the town. Tops recent relocation to the plaza has added to the traffic challenges.

Although the interior circulation of the plaza parking area is in desperate need of reconfiguration, these recommendations are limited to external improvements.

Figure 33 The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 43

The two key recommendations are: creating a roundabout at Grey Street and Quaker Rd./Hamburg St. (see ‘Gateways’ below) and widening Boies Alley into the primary entrance to the plaza (see Figure 33). Land could be acquired along the west side of Boies Alley to widen the roadway for two-way traffic. A cursory examination shows that no buildings will have to be demolished. In addition, the traffic signal at Douglas and Hamburg should be moved west to Boies and Hamburg. This will create better flow and greater stacking distance, as Boies is approximately midway between the signal at Oakwood and the proposed roundabout at Grey St. 5.5 Route 400 Interchange Completion of the Rt. 400 Expressway Interchange at East Main Street will help traffic flow and safety in the village. Constructing a southbound on-ramp and a northbound offramp, will allow traffic, especially truck traffic on Rt. 16, to by-pass the tight turn at Olean/Main Street (see Figure 34).

Northbound trucks will be able to enter Rt. 400 at its start south of the village and exit onto Main Street westbound.

Southbound trucks can continue on Main Street eastbound to the new southbound on Figure 34 ramp.

5.6 Create Gateways An opportunity exists to enhance the entrances to the Village of East Aurora by constructing ‘gateway’ features.

In addition to providing recognizable entries to the village, these will also serve as important traffic calming devices, meant to slow down traffic from highway speeds to village speeds. Excessive speed on approaches to the village is currently an issue, especially along East Main Street.

Western Gateway Reconfigure/reconstruct Mill Street to climb the hill to the southwest of the treatment plant to join Hamburg Street/Quaker Road at Grey St to form a Figure 35 The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 44

4-leg roundabout (see Figure 35). The existing stretch of Mill from Hamburg will be deadended. This will help divert plaza-bound traffic from south of the village directly to the plaza, as well as mitigating the current awkward Mill/Hamburg intersection.

Northwestern Gateway Create a new roundabout at the Seneca St./Buffalo St-Bowen Rd intersection (see Figure 36). A new main entrance to Knox Farm State Park could be located here as well, creating a four-leg roundabout. Although a small section of the historic stonewall will have to be modified, there are many advantages to having the main entrance to the new park here.

Figure 36 Eastern Gateway Create a short stretch of planted median, or an ‘island’ on East Main Street between Brook Lea Drive and the Rt. 400 off ramp (see Figure 37). This will help slow down traffic and provide a pedestrian refuge for crossing East Main Street.

Figure 37 6. CONCLUSION The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking, and Circulation Study provides a wealth of information on the existing traffic and circulation conditions in the Village of East Aurora and offers transportation options to further the goals and objectives of the community.

Additionally, the study provides a sound foundation for future transportation planning decisions.

The GBNRTC continues to work with the East Aurora Village Board and the Village Planning Board as a member of the Main Street Reconstruction Project Taskforce. Other

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 45

members of the group include representatives of the Aurora Town Board, the Aurora Town Planning Board, the Greater East Aurora Chamber of Commerce, Main Street property owners, residents, merchants, and the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT). The group serves as an advisory committee to NYSDOT for the design and implementation of the Main Street Reconstruction Project. The GBNRTC lends its modeling capabilities to the project utilizing SYCHRO to determine the potential effects of proposed development on the transportation performance of the corridor.

The Village of East Aurora Traffic, Parking and Circulation Study 46