Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 03/10/2016 - WEST ELIZABETH ENHANCED TRAVEL CORRIDOR PLANDATE: STAFF: March 10, 2016 Emma Belmont, Transit Planner Amy Lewin, Senior Transportation Planner Laurie Kadrich, Director of PDT WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION West Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor Plan. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to update Council on the West Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor Planning effort and to request feedback on key questions that will influence the next steps for the project. The project team developed four Design Approaches to test out potential concepts for the corridor: (1) Tweak and Tune, (2) Transportation Systems Management, (3) Traffic Calming, and (4) MAX on West Elizabeth. In addition, staff has developed an evaluation process which has led to a preliminary set of recommended design elements and proposed phasing, which incorporates design elements from all four Design Approaches. This project addresses Strategic Initiatives 5.6 and 6.1-6.6 related to improving travel for all modes in support of the Climate Action Plan goals. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. What are Council’s thoughts on the recommended elements and proposed phasing concepts presented? Are there any elements that are missing or that Council would like to see implemented differently? 2. Would Council like another work session on this project prior to considering adoption of the Plan in July? Are there specific items Council would like covered beyond what is listed in Next Steps? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Project Overview The West Elizabeth corridor is identified in the Transportation Master Plan (TMP) as part of a citywide network of Enhanced Travel Corridors (ETCs) - uniquely designed corridors with an emphasis on high-frequency transit, bicycling and walking as a way to support and manage growth. The project study area generally includes the area between Overland Trail and Shields (as well as the CSU Foothills and Main Campuses) and between Mulberry and Prospect. The West Elizabeth ETC Plan has developed a vision for the corridor based on an understanding of the transportation, land use, environmental, economic and social needs of the area. The Plan is an action item of the recently adopted West Central Area Plan (WCAP) and is anticipated to promote many of the goals and strategic initiatives identified in the Climate Action Plan (CAP), such as expanding the transit system and serving the needs of bicyclists and pedestrians, as well as motorists. The project will develop recommended short-and long-term improvements for the corridor, with the intent of improving safety and functionality for all users. The focus is on transit system alignment and frequency changes, bicycle and pedestrian facility improvements and intersection and lane configuration changes. Project Update Staff provided an update on the project to City Council in an October 29, 2015 memo (Attachment 1). Since that update, additional outreach has been completed and progress has been made on a number of tasks: March 10, 2016 Page 2  Community Engagement Additional community outreach included:  Public Open House (December, 2015)  CSU Landscape Architecture class on design options  “Questions of the Week” (online and text message-based)  Property owner meetings  Chamber of Commerce Local Legislative Affairs Committee  Technical Advisory Committee meetings  Stakeholder Committee meetings The primary focus of recent outreach was the Design Approaches and the evaluation process. Key concepts that received particularly strong support include:  A pilot protected intersection at City Park and West Elizabeth  Completion of the pedestrian network  Transit stop amenities  Safety improvements for all users  Higher frequency transit in the area This input contributed to the development of a preliminary Recommended Phasing of Improvements, which is described later in this AIS.  Boards and Commissions In addition to outreach conducted earlier in the planning process, staff discussed the project at the following board and commission meetings since October:  November 24 - Bicycle Advisory Committee  December 9 - Senior Advisory Board  December 11 - Planning and Zoning Board  December 16 - Transportation Board  December 22 - Air Quality Advisory Board  February 4 - Energy Board  February 11 - Commission on Disability  Coordination with Colorado State University (CSU) Staff continues to coordinate with the CSU Facilities and Transportation staff throughout the planning process, and CSU staff actively participates in many of the project outreach activities. The West Elizabeth project team is also coordinating with CSU and other City staff regarding improvements noted in the CSU/City Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) for the on-campus stadium, including the potential underpass of Shields at West Elizabeth and other at-grade intersection improvements.  Existing and Future Conditions The key themes of the existing conditions report were provided in the October 29, 2015 memo and are summarized below. The full Corridor Understanding Report documents existing and future conditions and is available on the project website (fcgov.com/westelizabeth). March 10, 2016 Page 3 Existing Conditions Highlights Transit Biking  Over 5,000 riders per day in study area  Overcrowded buses  People being left behind, despite using multiple trailer buses  Bus stops that are inaccessible and/or with limited or no passenger amenities  Over 2,000 cyclists per day  Inconsistent bike facility treatments  Bike and bus conflicts when buses stop in the bike lanes to drop off passengers  High crash locations Driving Walking  4,400 to over 18,000 vehicles per day (increasing from west to east)  Driveway conflicts between bicyclists, pedestrians, and vehicles  Vehicles crowding and/or blocking bike lanes at intersections  Perceived speeding and vehicles not yielding at crosswalks  Operational and safety concerns related to intersections  Over 100 pedestrians crossing during peak hours at key intersections  Missing sidewalks  Narrow sidewalks that are not compliant with American with Disabilities Act (ADA) regulations  Inaccessible crosswalk activation buttons  Visioning The project Vision Statement was included in the October 29, 2015 memo and is provided below. This Vision guides the development of designs and action items for the West Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor. The vision for the West Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor is to be an easily accessible and reliable multimodal corridor with an emphasis on connectivity to CSU's Foothills Campus on the west and CSU's Main Campus (including MAX stations) on the east. The corridor will be well-integrated and well- connected within the city, with a focus on improving transit, walking and biking. The corridor will foster existing business and future infill and redevelopment to accommodate the growing number and diversity of users in the corridor, including students, families and seniors. The network shall: o Be unique and adaptable to the distinctive characteristics of each corridor segment. o Be safe and comfortable for all users. o Encourage and prioritize public transportation and active transportation options. o Support the interconnectivity of all modes. o Be a beautiful and vibrant environment. Design Approaches Four Design Approaches were drafted to test different ways of meeting the corridor vision, each focusing on a priority identified by the public for the corridor.  Guiding Principles The development of the Design Approaches was based on the following guiding principles: o Emphasize high-frequency transit, biking, and walking to help accommodate growth (per the Enhanced Travel Corridor definition) o Work within the existing Public Right-of-Way (ROW) as much as possible o Incorporate potential phasing from the beginning of design development March 10, 2016 Page 4 o Learn from the evaluation of the Design Approaches to understand trade-offs and make further refinements to the corridor design  Descriptions The Design Approaches are listed below, and a summary, including cross-sections and key design elements, is provided in Attachment 2. o Tweak and Tune: Fall 2016 implementation of transit improvements that could be funded within Transfort’s existing budget o Transportation System Management (TSM): near-term, lower investment improvements to improve the efficiency of transit and complete the bike and pedestrian network to minimum standards o Traffic Calming: longer-term, higher investment improvements that increase transit service capacity to accommodate growing demands (focused on Constitution and Plum), and further improve the bike and pedestrian networks with upgrades to protected bike lanes and detached sidewalks o MAX on West Elizabeth: longer-term, higher investment improvements to add Bus Rapid Transit service on West Elizabeth through CSU’s Main Campus, connecting to MAX, with high quality stations and service branding like MAX All of the Design Approaches maintain the existing number of travel lanes, with the exception of MAX on West Elizabeth, which explores converting one travel lane in each direction into bus-only (and vehicular right-turns) in the Campus West area. ·Evaluation The Design Approaches were evaluated both quantitatively and qualitatively. Quantitative evaluation includes a Multi-modal Level of Service (MMLOS) assessment of each Design Approach for all modes. The qualitative evaluation includes criteria that were created as part of the project’s Vision, Purpose, and Need, as well as Transportation Master Plan policies and elements related to Sustainability Assessment. The criteria include: Evaluation Criteria Criterion Description Multi-modal Transit  High-frequency (15 minutes or less)  Reliable  Sufficient capacity Biking  Convenient/efficient  Safety  Comfort Walking  Complete network  Convenient/efficient  Safety Driving  Safety  Efficiency and convenience Supports Economic Conditions  Supports existing and future economic development Beautiful, Vibrant, and Attractive Public Places  Create a “sense of place” Well-Connected  Supports interconnectivity of modes March 10, 2016 Page 5 Evaluation Criteria Criterion Description Fiscally Responsible  Uses public funds wisely Community Support  Supported by community based on outreach Each Design Approach was evaluated according to the criteria listed above. Some measures incorporate both the qualitative and quantitative assessment to determine the criterion’s rating of High, Medium or Low. A summary of the evaluation is provided in Attachment 3. The intent is to use this evaluation as an initial “check-in” that can guide potential refinements as we move forward. Transitioning from Evaluation to Preliminary Recommended Design The evaluation identified both the benefits and trade-offs that the potential improvements offer. For example, initial assessment of some of the intersection treatments proposed in the Traffic Calming and MAX on West Elizabeth Design Approaches showed a substantial increase in delays (and emissions) for vehicular traffic at those intersections. The project team intends to strive for an appropriate balance of benefits and impacts and to refine elements in a way that is beneficial to multiple modes. The team will work to refine the recommended design to support safety, and ensure improved transit, pedestrian and bike environments while maintaining adequate vehicular operations. The review and evaluation of the Design Approaches confirmed the team’s planned strategy of: (1) Including elements from multiple Design Approaches in the Recommended Design (rather than a wholesale selection of one complete Design Approach); (2) Phasing those elements strategically. Preliminary Recommended Design Elements and Proposed Phasing This section presents an initial draft of four phases in which the preliminary recommended design elements could be implemented. Preliminary Recommended Design Elements and Phasing Implementation Timeframe Potential Design Elements 2016 Improvements (cost neutral) Transit  Route alignment changes to simplify network and improve capacity in high demand locations Near-term* (2-5 years out) Likely 2017-2018 BFO Offer All Modes  At grade improvements at Shields Street (coordinated with CSU stadium improvements) – lane improvements, pedestrian safety, bike crossings, signal timing changes, etc. Walking  Completion of the sidewalk network to meet minimum ADA requirements (attached sidewalk in locations where detached option is not viable) Biking  Completion of bike lanes (buffered or conventional)  Intersection improvements such as targeted use of green paint at intersections and two-stage turn queue boxes Transit  Transit Signal Priority (TSP) at select intersections  ADA-compliant bus stops with benches and/or shelters  Frequency enhancements on transit routes  CSU Equine Center Transit Station/Park and Ride March 10, 2016 Page 6 Preliminary Recommended Design Elements and Phasing Implementation Timeframe Potential Design Elements  Potential for direct connection to Downtown Long-term (5-10 years out) Pursuit of grant funding is expected Walking  Complete sidewalk network (detached) Biking  One-way protected bike lanes  Protected intersection at City Park Avenue (pilot project) Driving  Access management near King Soopers and Campus West  Roundabouts at Overland Trail and potentially Ponderosa Drive  Medians Transit  High frequency transit along West Elizabeth – Constitution – Plum alignment with direct connection through CSU’s Main Campus to Downtown/MAX on Mason Longer-term (Dependent on redevelopment of the Campus West area)** Transit  New MAX service on West Elizabeth Street with direct connection through CSU’s Main Campus to Downtown/MAX on Mason  High-quality transit stations *The full set of improvements associated with the City/CSU IGA is not listed here **Additional potential improvements for cyclists and pedestrians are yet to be determined Question for Council: What are Council’s thoughts on the recommended elements and proposed phasing concepts presented? Are there any elements that are missing or that Council would like to see implemented differently? Next Steps  Refine recommended design elements and their phasing, complete full Sustainability Assessment  Continue implementation planning (e.g., refinements to phasing, detailed cost estimates, etc.)  Address broader corridor needs, such as: o Improvements for other key roads (e.g., Constitution, Plum, City Park, Shields) o Refinements to the Low-Stress Bike Network identified in the Bicycle Master Plan (2014) o Parking o Maintenance (e.g., snow removal, debris sweeping, bicycle striping, etc.) The project’s Public Engagement Plan includes a memo update prior to the adoption hearing in July 2016. Question for Council: Would Council like another work session prior to considering adoption of the plan in July? Are there specific items Council would like covered beyond what is listed under Next Steps? March 10, 2016 Page 7 ATTACHMENTS 1. Project Update memo, October 29, 2015 (PDF) 2. Design Approach Summary (PDF) 3. Evaluation Summary (PDF) 4. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) ATTACHMENT 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY WEST ELIZABETH ENHANCED TRAVEL CORRIDOR IVREPORT CORRIDOR UNDERSTANDING THE WEST ELIZABETH ENHANCED TRAVEL CORRIDOR PLAN WILL PROVIDE A ROAD MAP FOR BOTH SHORT- TERM RECOMMENDATIONS AND A LONG-TERM VISION FOR THE CORRIDOR BASED ON AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE NEEDS OF THE AREA. ENHANCED TRAVEL CORRIDORS (ETCs) are defined by the City’s Transportation Master Plan (TMP) as corridors that emphasize high-frequency transit, bicycling and walking. This Corridor Understanding Report documents the West Elizabeth Corridor’s history and context, previous planning that has influenced the corridor, and existing conditions of the corridor’s infrastructure and performance for different modes of transportation. Future steps of the West Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor Plan development process will build upon the Corridor Understanding Report: developing a Purpose and Need Statement and Corridor Vision, developing and evaluating alternative improvement scenarios, and developing a preferred alternative, with both near-term and longer-term implementation recommendations. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY LEGEND West Elizabeth Study Corridor Study Area MAX Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) MAX Stations WEST ELIZABETH ENHANCED TRAVEL CORRIDOR VREPORT CORRIDOR UNDERSTANDING STUDY AREA The West Elizabeth ETC focuses on West Elizabeth Street between Overland Trail and Shields Street, as well as segments of Plum Street, Constitution Avenue, and City Park Avenue. The study area also includes the surrounding network, and the plan will look at how this corridor connects with the CSU campuses and the rest of the community. WEST ELIZABETH ENHANCED TRAVEL CORRIDOR VIREPORT CORRIDOR UNDERSTANDING EXECUTIVE SUMMARY WEST ELIZABETH ENHANCED TRAVEL CORRIDOR VIIREPORT CORRIDOR UNDERSTANDING WEST ELIZABETH CORRIDOR SUMMARY OF KEY ISSUES WEST ELIZABETH ENHANCED TRAVEL CORRIDOR VIIIREPORT CORRIDOR UNDERSTANDING EXECUTIVE SUMMARY WEST ELIZABETH ENHANCED TRAVEL CORRIDOR IXREPORT CORRIDOR UNDERSTANDING 1»LAND USE Land use on the West Elizabeth Corridor includes a mix of types and densities of development, including multi-family, single family, as well as commercial parcels near the West Elizabeth Street/Shields Street and West Elizabeth Street/Taft Hill Road intersections. Land use surrounding the Campus West area has some of the highest densities allowed in the city, including dense multi-family housing on Plum Street affiliated with Colorado State University. A large proportion of the study area’s residents are renters, many of whom are CSU students. 2»RIGHT-OF-WAY Right-of-way on the corridor varies from 60 to 100 feet between Shields Street and Overland Trail. 3»CROSS SECTIONS West Elizabeth Street’s cross section includes two to four travel lanes between Shields Street and Overland Trail. Near Shields Street, West Elizabeth Street has four travel lanes (two in each direction) with a two-way left-turn lane. West of Skyline Drive, West Elizabeth Street has two travel lanes with a two-way left-turn lane. West of Kimball Drive, West Elizabeth Street has two travel lanes. 4»TRAVEL DEMAND The amount of traffic on West Elizabeth Street generally increases from west to east. Near Timber Lane the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) is 4,400 vehicles per day and near Shields Street the ADT is over 18,000 vehicles per day. West Elizabeth Street also carries a large number of transit passengers, bicyclists and pedestrians. Transfort routes in the study area have an average weekday ridership of almost 5,000 passengers per day. Over 2,000 bicyclists per day use West Elizabeth Street west of Shields Street and over 100 pedestrian crossings occur during peak hours at Shields Street/West Elizabeth Street, City Park EXECUTIVE SUMMARY WEST ELIZABETH ENHANCED TRAVEL CORRIDOR XREPORT CORRIDOR UNDERSTANDING 4 1 2 3 5 6 WEST ELIZABETH ENHANCED TRAVEL CORRIDOR XIREPORT CORRIDOR UNDERSTANDING a measurement of the quality of the pedestrian environment that accounts for sidewalk presence and width as well as other amenities. 8»BICYCLISTS Bike lanes are provided along the majority of the corridor, but are missing from key segments of West Elizabeth Street, including several segments west of Taft Hill Road. Most of the corridor is sufficiently comfortable for the many residents and college students who currently ride on West Elizabeth Street. However, these segments are generally not comfortable for lower-confidence adults/college students as well as children. 6»TRANSIT Several Transfort bus routes serve the study area, the majority of which connect to the CSU Transit Center. Route 31, which connects West Elizabeth Street and Plum Street to the CSU Transit Center, runs every 10 minutes. The HORN and MAX also run every 10 minutes. Most other routes operate every 30 minutes. Transfort ridership in the area is generally high. In fact, ridership is so high on some routes bound for CSU that drivers regularly have to turn away passengers because the buses are full, even with the addition of trailer buses during peak hours. Top ridership stops in the study area include the CSU Transit Center, stops along Plum Street, Constitution Avenue between Shields Street and West Elizabeth Street, and stops on West Elizabeth Street just west of Taft Hill Road. Some of the study area’s routes, including Route 31, Route 32, and Route 2, have a high productivity as measured by weekday passengers per revenue hour and weekday passengers per revenue mile. 7»PEDESTRIANS For pedestrians, a variety of sidewalk conditions exist on the corridor. Some sidewalks are attached, some are detached, 7 WEST ELIZABETH ENHANCED TRAVEL CORRIDOR XIIREPORT CORRIDOR UNDERSTANDING EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 9»SAFETY The study area has some intersections and roadway segments with a higher than expected number of crashes. For example, the West Elizabeth Street/Shields Street intersection has more crashes than expected compared to similar locations, and the West Elizabeth Street/City Park Avenue intersection has more bicyclist-vehicle crashes than expected compared to similar locations. West Elizabeth Street between Shields Street and City Park Avenue also has more crashes than expected compared to similar locations. 10» DELAY BY MODE Over half of the users at the intersection of Shields Street and Plum Street are using transit, walking or biking. At this intersection, transit passengers, pedestrians and bicyclists experience a lot of delay, while vehicle drivers and passengers do not experience a lot of delay. 9 10 8 WEST ELIZABETH ENHANCED TRAVEL CORRIDOR XIIIREPORT CORRIDOR UNDERSTANDING WEST ELIZABETH CORRIDOR EXISTING CONDITIONS HIGHLIGHTS 119 Injury Crashes 341 Non-Injury Crashes SAFETY CRASHES ON WEST ELIZABETH STREET BETWEEN 2010 & 2014 460 Total Crashes 0 460 62 14 Bicycle-Involved Crashes Pedestrian-Involved Crashes CSU Main Campus CSU Foothills Campus CONSTITUTION AVE W ELIZABETH ST W PLUM ST S SHIELDS ST CITY PARK PONDEROSA DR S TAFT HILL RD OVERLAND TRL Indicates more crashes than expected compared to similar ŝŶƚĞƌƐĞĐƟŽŶƐwithin the city Indicates more crashes than expected compared to similar ƐĞŐŵĞŶƚƐwithin the city Average of 1 crash every 4 days. WEST ELIZABETH ENHANCED TRAVEL CORRIDOR XIVREPORT CORRIDOR UNDERSTANDING EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NUMBER OF PEOPLE BY MODE PM PEAK HOUR WEST ELIZABETH STREET & PLUM STREET West Elizabeth Street (between City Park and Shields) Plum Street (between City Park and Shields) 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 WEST ELIZABETH ENHANCED TRAVEL CORRIDOR XVREPORT CORRIDOR UNDERSTANDING WEST ELIZABETH CORRIDOR EXISTING CONDITIONS HIGHLIGHTS TRANSIT DRIVING AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC Almost 5,000 riders a day within the study area (9 routes): Highest ridership in the city Over 3,700 passengers left behind on Route 31 from January to April 2015. That’s equJvalent to over 37MAX buses or 75 standard Transfort buses. TRANSIT BOARDINGS Transit boardings from January - April 2015 APC Data ! < 100 ! 100 - 200 ! > 200 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! CSU Main Campus CSU Foothills Campus CSU Transit Center ( ! T CONSTITUTION AVE W ELIZABETH ST WEST ELIZABETH ENHANCED TRAVEL CORRIDOR XVIREPORT CORRIDOR UNDERSTANDING EXECUTIVE SUMMARY WALKING *Pedestrian Level of Comfort is based on a technical analysis of existing data *Bicyclist Level of Comfort is based on a Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) technical analysis of existing data sources 30% 42% 28% Low Pedestrian Comfort Medium Pedestrian Comfort High Pedestrian Comfort West Elizabeth Street & City Park Avenue AVERAGE PM PEAK HOUR PEDESTRIAN DELAY West Elizabeth Street & Shields Street PEDESTRIAN LEVEL OF COMFORT* CORRIDOR-WIDE BICYCLING BICYCLIST LEVEL OF COMFORT | CORRIDOR-WIDE 1% 50% 49% Low Bicyclist Comfort Medium Bicyclist Comfort High Bicyclist Comfort 36% of sidewalks in the corridor are non-ADA compliant, of which: 7% are missing sidewalks. 29 seconds seconds 57 After 30 seconds, research has indicated that pedestrians partake in more risk-taking behavior. Design Approach Summary ATTACHMENT 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction....................................................................................................... Tweak and Tune............................................................................................... Transportation Systems Management (TSM).............................................. Green Paint Treatment and Two-stage Turn Boxes at Intersections........................................................................................... Access Management............................................................................ Transit Signal Priority............................................................................ CSU Equine Center Transit Station/Park and Ride.......................... Leading Pedestrian Interval................................................................. 7UDIÀF&DOPLQJ One-way Protected Bike Lanes............................................................ Protected Intersection.......................................................................... High-frequency Transit Alignment...................................................... MAX on West Elizabeth.................................................................................... High-frequency Transit Alignment...................................................... 1 1 2 3 3 3 4 4 5 6 6 6 7 8 i Tweak and Tune This Design Approach includes only transit service improvements (e.g., adjustments to route DOLJQPHQWVVFKHGXOHVDQGVHUYLFHIUHTXHQFLHV Transportation Systems Management (TSM) &RPSOHWHELNHODQHVgreen paint treatment at intersections, two-stage turn queue boxes Access managementQHDU.LQJ6RRSHUVDQG&DPSXV:HVW Bus stop amenities (shelters, benches, etc.), transit signal priority, CSU Equine Center transit station &RPSOHWHVLGHZDONQHWZRUNWRPLQLPXPVWDQGDUGVleading pedestrian intervals Travel lane Travel lane &HQWHUWXUQ Travel lane Travel lane lane Bike lane Bike lane Side- Sidewalk walk Examples are provided for all bolded items 2 Typical cross-section in Campus West Design Elements Explored Green Paint Treatment and Two-stage Turn Boxes at Intersections • Green paint through the intersections help delineate bicyclist space and provide a clear indication of cyclists’ intended path • Two-stage turn boxes allow bicyclists to navigate the intersection in two stages, as opposed to PHUJLQJZLWKWUDI¿FDQGXVLQJWKHOHIWWXUQODQH • Proposed changes aim to maintain as much access as possible into properties while restricting high-risk movements, notably left turns out of driveways • Strategic use of medians and signed restrictions to prohibit turning movements at key LQWHUVHFWLRQVDQGWRGLUHFWWKHÀRZRIWUDI¿F Access Management Transit Signal Priority (TSP) • Operational improvements to signals that help reduce how long a bus waits at intersections • Intersection signals sense when a bus is nearby and keep the light green so that the bus gets through the intersection 3 CSU Equine Center Transit Station/Park and Ride • 3URSRVHGWUDQVLWVWDWLRQDWWKH&68(TXLQH &HQWHUWRVHUYHDVDFRQQHFWLRQEHWZHHQWKH FRUULGRUDQGWKH)RRWKLOOV&DPSXV • Potential park and ride location – may function as long-term parking lot for on-campus residents • Leading pedestrian signal gives pedestrians a 3-7 second head start when entering the intersection • Enhances the visibility of pedestrians and reinforces their right-of-way over turning vehicles Leading Pedestrian Interval 4 7UDIÀF&DOPLQJ One-way protected bike lanes, green paint treatment at intersections, two-stage turn queue boxes, protected intersection at City Park Avenue $FFHVVPDQDJHPHQWQHDU.LQJ6RRSHUVDQG&DPSXV:HVWURXQGDERXWVDW2YHUODQG Trail and Ponderosa Drive, operational improvements at Shields Street, medians High-frequency transit DORQJ:HVW(OL]DEHWK&RQVWLWXWLRQ3OXPDOLJQPHQW &RPSOHWHVLGHZDONZLWKODQGVFDSHGVHSDUDWLRQZKHUHSRVVLEOHOHDGLQJSHGHVWULDQ intervals Travel lane Travel lane Median/ Travel lane Travel lane &HQWHUWXUQ lane Bike lane* Bike lane* Sidewalk Sidewalk Typical cross-section in Campus West 5 Examples are provided for all bolded items *Bike lane design still under consideration Design Elements Explored Protected Intersection • 3RWHQWLDOSLORWSURMHFWDW&LW\3DUN :HVW Elizabeth • An intersection that provides enhanced separation and protection for pedestrians and F\FOLVWVIURPYHKLFXODUWUDI¿F • Typical features include: corner refuge islands, forward stop bar for bicyclists, setback pedestrian crossing, and bicycle-friendly signal phasing One-way Protected Bike Lanes • Protected bike lanes provide an additional element of vertical separation between vehicular travel lanes and bike lanes • Vertical separation typically takes the form of a curb, plastic posts, parked cars, planters, or a raised path (bike lane design still under consideration) High-frequency Transit Alignment • High-frequency transit along West Elizabeth &RQVWLWXWLRQ3OXP'RZQWRZQ H[DFW alignment TBD) • 0D\LQFOXGHKLJKTXDOLW\EXVVWRSVDQGRUÀHHW 6 MAIN CAMPUS FOOTHILLS CAMPUS MAX on West Elizabeth One-way protected bike lanes, green paint treatment at intersections, two-stage turn TXHXHER[HVSURWHFWHGLQWHUVHFWLRQDW&LW\3DUN$YHQXH $FFHVVPDQDJHPHQWQHDU.LQJ6RRSHUVDQG&DPSXV:HVWURXQGDERXWVDW2YHUODQG Trail and Ponderosa Drive, operational improvements at Shields Street, medians BRT-style service, similar to MAX, along West Elizabeth alignment with bus only lanes &RPSOHWHVLGHZDONZLWKODQGVFDSHGVHSDUDWLRQZKHUHSRVVLEOHOHDGLQJSHGHVWULDQ intervals Bus only lane Travel lane Median/ Travel lane &HQWHUWXUQ lane Bike lane* Bike lane* Sidewalk Bus only Sidewalk lane Typical cross-section in Campus West 7 Examples are provided for all bolded items *Bike lane design still under consideration Design Elements Explored High-frequency Transit Alignment • BRT-style service, similar to MAX, along West Elizabeth - Downtown (exact alignment TBD) • May include high-quality bus stops with curb- VLGHORDGLQJEUDQGHGÀHHWDQGEXVRQO\ODQHV 8 MAIN CAMPUS FOOTHILLS CAMPUS Evaluation Summary 1 West Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor Evaluation Summary Evaluation Criteria The criteria used to evaluate the Design Approaches developed for the West Elizabeth Corridor are described below. Each criterion is based on the Fort Collins Transportation Master Plan (TMP) and the West Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor Purpose & Need Statement. The specific principle or policy from the TMP is referenced following the criterion description. x Multi-modal transportation network – a transportation network that allows for the safe, accessible and convenient use of all modes. o Transit ƒ High frequency transit service – Creates a transit service that runs frequently enough (15 minute or less headways) to allow users to make trips without consulting a schedule; service is frequent enough to allow for the convenient use of the transit network to major destinations (TMP Policy T10.6, Purpose & Need Statement) ƒ Reliable transit service – Creates a transit service that runs consistently on schedule to allow users to arrive at their destination predictably (TMP Policy T10.2, Purpose & Need Statement) ƒ Sufficient transit capacity – Creates a transit service that provides or can provide enough capacity to meet the current and anticipated future demand for transit, with available space for all desiring riders (Purpose & Need Statement) o Biking ƒ Promotes convenient and efficient biking – Promotes convenient and efficient bicycling (TMP Policy T8.1, Purpose & Need Statement) ƒ Safe bicycle access – Creates bicycle infrastructure that provides access to key destinations and transit stops (TMP Policy T11.1 and T12.1, Purpose & Need Statement) ƒ Comfort for bicyclists – Creates a network of bicycle facilities that is complete and comfortable for all users, by providing continuous designated bicycle facilities along segments and at crossings (TMP Principle T11, Purpose & Need Statement) o Pedestrian ƒ Complete pedestrian network – Creates a sidewalk network that is complete and ADA accessible (TMP Principle T12, Purpose & Need Statement) ƒ Promotes convenient and efficient walking – Promotes a convenient and efficient walking environment (TMP Policy T8.1, Purpose & Need Statement) ATTACHMENT 3 Evaluation Summary 2 ƒ Safe pedestrian access – Creates pedestrian infrastructure that provides access to key destinations and transit stops (TMP Policy T11.1 and T12.1, Purpose & Need Statement) o Vehicular ƒ Vehicular safety – Reduces the negative safety impacts associated with vehicle turn conflicts at driveways and queue spillbacks at intersections (TMP Principle T18, Purpose & Need Statement) ƒ Vehicular efficiency – Creates a transportation network that allows for efficient and easy use of vehicles by minimizing congestion and increasing mobility in alignment with level of service standards (TMP Principle T13 and T25, Purpose & Need Statement) x Economic opportunity – Promotes economic vitality for businesses along and near the corridor by easing access for all modes and creating an attractive environment for customers (TMP Policy T2.1, Purpose & Need Statement) x Beautiful, vibrant and attractive public spaces – Creates an aesthetically appealing corridor consisting of a well-designed streetscape (TMP Policy T4.4, Purpose & Need Statement) x Well-connected transportation network – Creates a transportation network that provides safe and comfortable access between modes and to destinations including pedestrian and bicycle access to transit (TMP Policy T9.2, Purpose & Need Statement) x Fiscal responsibility –Supports a model for development that allows the City of Fort Collins to be financially strong and economically resilient by implementing cost-effective projects (TMP Policy T6.2 and T14.2, Purpose & Need Statement) x Community support – Reflects the vision and values of the community (TMP Principle T24, Purpose & Need Statement) Evaluation Summary 3 Evaluation Summary Matrix Each Design Approach was evaluated with ratings of Low, Medium or High, depending on how well it met the criteria described above. The table below summarizes the evaluation. In addition, a Cost Magnitude column is included on the far right to indicate the costs for each Design Approach in relation to each other. Detailed cost estimates will be done as part of the refinement of the Recommended Design. Design Approach Multi-Modal Supports Economic Conditions Beautiful, Vibrant and Attractive Well-Connected Fiscally Responsible Community Support Cost magnitude (estimate) Transit Bike Pedestrian Vehicular Tweak and Tune - Transportation Systems Management (TSM) $ Traffic Calming Med- High $$$$ MAX on West Elizabeth $$$$$ High Med Low Evaluation Summary 4 Evaluation Rating Highlights by Design Approach Tweak and Tune Rating Highlights Low x Only changes the transit alignments that serve the corridor, so most of the criteria rate Low for this approach. Medium x The transit criteria rated Medium because there are some benefits seen for the transit system with this approach. x Vehicular mobility was also rated Medium because relative to the other alternatives it has the least impact on vehicular operations. High x Fiscal Responsibility rates High because this option assumes all changes would be done within the current budget. Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Rating Highlights Low x The Beautiful, Vibrant and Attractive measure rates Low because no beautification is included in this Design Approach. Medium x Most measures rate Medium for this approach because the low cost improvements have some benefit but do not make substantial changes in the corridor to warrant a High rating. High x Fiscal Responsibility rates High because of the low cost nature of the TSM improvements. Traffic Calming Rating Highlights Low x Vehicular mobility rates Low due to the initial assessment of some of the intersection treatments proposed, which modeling has shown could increase delays for traffic at certain intersections. Medium x Fiscal Responsibility rates Medium due to the increased investment required compared to the first two approaches. Medium- High x Supports Economic Conditions measure rates Medium/High because although it does not provide high-frequency transit service through the Campus West area but it does support the high-density housing along Constitution Avenue and Plum Street. High x Many of the measures in the evaluation matrix rate High because of the significant improvements proposed for the transit, biking and walking environments. Evaluation Summary 5 MAX on West Elizabeth Rating Highlights Low x Vehicular mobility rates Low due to the initial assessment of some of the intersection treatments proposed, which modeling has shown could increase delays for traffic at certain intersections. Medium x Fiscal Responsibility rates Medium due to the increased investment required compared to the first two approaches. High x Similar to the Traffic Calming approach, the MAX on West Elizabeth approach rates High for most measures due to the enhancements proposed for the transit, biking and pedestrian environments, with the exception of Vehicular Mobility and Fiscal Responsibility. 1 Amy Lewin, Senior Transportation Planner – FC Moves Emma Belmont, Transit Planner – Transfort 3-10-16 West Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor Plan ATTACHMENT 4 Questions for Council 1. What are Council’s thoughts on the recommended elements and proposed phasing concepts presented? Are there any elements that are missing or that you would like to see implemented differently? 2. Would Council like another Work Session on this project prior to considering adoption of the plan in July? Are there specific items Council would like covered beyond what is listed in Next Steps? 2 What is an ETC? Enhanced Travel Corridor (ETC) “Uniquely designed corridors that are planned to incorporate • high frequency transit, • bicycling, and • walking as part of the corridor” - Transportation Master Plan (2011) Planned Network of ETCs Project Study Area 4 5 What are we trying to solve? What are we trying to solve? 6 What are we trying to solve? 7 What are we trying to solve? 8 Community Engagement—What We Did 9 High-Tech Tools & Media Public Activities & Events Key Stakeholders Community Engagement—What We Heard 10 • Corridor needs to be safe and comfortable for all users • Transit should be prioritized for the future • Users want reliable transportation options for all modes Vision 11 • Be unique and adaptable to the distinctive characteristics of each corridor segment • Be safe and comfortable for all users • Encourage and prioritize public transportation and active transportation options • Support the interconnectivity of all modes • Be a beautiful and vibrant environment Design Approaches 12 Tweak and Tune Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Traffic Calming MAX on West Elizabeth Near-Term Longer-Term, w/Redevelopment Longer-Term 2016 Evaluation Process 13 Design Approaches Evaluation Trade-offs Individual Design Elements Qualitative evaluation: • Transportation Master Plan goals • West Elizabeth Vision, Purpose & Need Quantitative evaluation: • Detailed, performance-based • Comfort, safety, mobility (travel time, LOS) for all modes Preliminary Recommendations 14 Long-Term with Redevelopment BRT-like Service on West Elizabeth Long-Term High-Frequency Transit on West Elizabeth-Constitution-Plum Protected Bike Lanes, Protected Intersection Complete Sidewalk Network (full standards) Roundabouts at Key Intersections Near-Term Transit Service and Amenity Improvements Complete Bike Network Complete Sidewalk Network (minimum standards) August 2016 Transit Service Changes Next Steps 15 • Refine design • Sustainability Analysis • Continue implementation planning (cost estimates) • Address broader corridor needs – Parking – Maintenance – Low-stress bike network Questions for Council 16 1. What are Council’s thoughts on the recommended elements and proposed phasing concepts presented? Are there any elements that are missing or that you would like to see implemented differently? 2. Would Council like another Work Session on this project prior to considering adoption of the plan in July? Are there specific items Council would like covered beyond what is listed in Next Steps? 7KHGHWDLOVDUHVWLOOEHLQJUH¿QHGDQGQR changes are currently proposed to existing cross-sections. Introduction 1 Four Design Approaches were drafted to test different ways of meeting the corridor Vision. (DFKIRFXVHVRQDSULRULW\LGHQWL¿HGE\WKHSXEOLFIRUWKHFRUULGRU • Tweak and Tune • Transportation Systems Management (TSM) • 7UDI¿F&DOPLQJ • MAX on West Elizabeth All of the Design Approaches maintain the existing number of travel lanes, with the exception of MAX on West Elizabeth, which explores converting one travel lane in each direction into a EXVRQO\ DQGYHKLFXODUULJKWWXUQ ODQHLQWKH&DPSXV:HVWDUHD 7\SLFDOFURVVVHFWLRQVIRUWKH&DPSXV:HVWDUHDDUHSURYLGHGIRUHDFK'HVLJQ$SSURDFK H[FHSWIRU7ZHDNDQG7XQHZKLFKGRHVQRWLQFOXGHDQ\FURVVVHFWLRQPRGL¿FDWLRQV'HVLJQ Approach descriptions also include key design elements that were explored, some of which have example concepts provided. Please note that in many cases the design elements included in the different Design Approaches are replicated from one approach to the next. This is for two main reasons: 1. The Design Approaches were designed with the potential to phase improvements. 2. 6RPHGHVLJQHOHPHQWVSURYHGWREHH[WUHPHO\HI¿FLHQWDWDGGUHVVLQJNH\FRQGLWLRQV LGHQWL¿HGLQWKHFRUULGRU Example concepts for design elements that were included in multiple Design Approaches are only shown once. W PLUM ST S SHIELDS ST S TAFT HILL RD OVERLAND TRL CITY PARK AVE ! CSU Main Campus CSU Foothills Campus CONSTITUTION AVE W ELIZABETH ST W PLUM ST S SHIELDS ST S TAFT HILL RD OVERLAND TRL CITY PARK AVE Average Daily Traffic (ADT) < 5,000 5,001 - 10,000 10,001 - 15,000 15,001 - 20,000 > 20,000 s equJvalent t The two text highlights were revised from the original memo sent to Council. and there are many locations where no sidewalk exists or sidewalk width is too narrow for people using mobility devices. In addition to marked crossings at signalized intersections, there are two midblock crossings on the corridor: one west of Shields Street and another west of Skyline Drive. Pedestrian delay at signalized intersections is relatively high at most study intersections during peak hours. Significant lengths of West Elizabeth Street have a low pedestrian level of service, This Corridor Understanding Report documents the West Elizabeth Corridor’s history and context, previous planning that has influenced the corridor, and existing conditions of the corridor’s infrastructure and performance for different modes of transportation. Avenue/West Elizabeth Street and Plum Street/Shields Street intersections. Furthermore, the Plum Street/Shields Street intersection has the largest number of transit passengers, bicyclists and pedestrians in the study area. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5» VEHICLE OPERATIONS Analysis shows that most study intersections operate at an acceptable vehicle level of service (LOS), a measure of average vehicle delay, during peak hours. However, key approaches to certain intersections experience notable congestion: the northbound left-turn, eastbound left-turn, and eastbound right- turn at the West Elizabeth Street/ Shields Street intersection and the eastbound and westbound movements at the Plum Street/ Shields Street intersection. 5,000 p The highlighted text was updated since the original memo.