community input - colorado springs...99.5 acres zoned as general and intermediate business (c-6,...

Community InputJuly 20th, 2017

Opening/Welcome

▪ Nina Vetter

▪ Susan Watkins

Master Plan Background▪ Renew North Nevada Avenue project area was identified

by the City as an Economic Opportunity Zone in 2013

▪ Project given: Vehicle and pedestrian safety standards and infrastructure standards must be addressed.

▪ Master Plan was approved by City Council in March 2017

▪ Master Plan Purpose

▪ Build on existing opportunities…▪ - Large and small businesses

▪ - Established neighborhoods

▪ - Transportation connections and nearby

▪ infrastructure improvements

▪ - UCCS campus and National Cyber Security Center

▪ - University Village

▪ - Access to regional trails

▪ To create a thriving community gateway

Transportation Sub-Plan Intent

▪ One of the first steps in beginning ▪ implementation the of Master Plan

▪ Transportation Sub-Plan Goals

▪ Improve roadway connections in and around the project corridor to serve businesses and residents.

▪ To enhance safety and efficiency for all users.

▪ Address the current and future transit needs of the corridor and improve transit access to and from the Colorado Springs community.

▪ Encourage land use decisions that are sensitive to impacts on car trip generation.

Master Plan VisionProvides a Guide

Agenda

▪ 6:00 PM Opening/Welcome

▪ 6:10 PM Agenda Review

▪ 6:20 PM Transportation 101

▪ 6:30 PM Main Presentation

▪ 6:50 PM Questions for Clarification

▪ 7:00 PM Small Group Workand Report Out

▪ 7:50 PM Wrap-Up and Next Steps

Workshop Rules

▪ Say what you think

▪ Be brief so everybody gets a chance to talk

▪ Listen carefully and with respect to the opinions and beliefs of others

▪ Be open to compromise

▪ Hold your questions until after the presentation

Transportation& Land Use

▪ Inseparable Elements of Community

Troy Russ, AICP

National Best Practices: Integrating Transportation and Land Use

The character of a community responds to the design and function of the transportation investment

Bone Structure

Street Network = Bone StructureBone Structure

Bone Structure – Land Use ArrangementBone Structure: Land Use Arrangement

Bone Structure: Streetscape

The Bone Structure – Building StockBone Structure: Architecture

Co

nve

nti

on

al A

pp

roac

h

MoreEfficiency

Syst

em

Man

agem

ent

More Pavement

Mo

re L

anes

Mo

re R

oad

s

ITS

Mo

re C

ars

Anticipate Forecast Accommodate

Land Use Travel Road Capacity

generates demands

Land Use/Transportation

ConventionalLand Use/Transportation

Cycle

Land Use

Travel

Definesgenerates

Road Character

Changes

generates

Land Use

Changes

Defines

TravelRoad Character

Land Use

Travel Patterns Road Capacity

Road Capacity Travel Patterns

Land Use

Land Use/Transportation

Travel

Generates

Community character

Defines

Integrated- Land Use/Transportation

Land Use

Travel Patterns &Mode Split

Capacity

Integrated Land Use/Transportation

Lateral Approach

Streetscape and Urban Design

User View and Comfort

Context-Sensitive Design

Traffic Calming

Personal Security

Land Use Density and Mix

Road Network Connectivity

Shared Economy

Pricing

Telecommuting/ E-Commerce

Parking Supply

Lane Limits

Change LOS Standards

Manage, Not “Solve”Co

nve

nti

on

al A

pp

roac

h

MoreEfficiency

Syst

em

Man

agem

ent

More Pavement

Mo

re L

anes

Mo

re R

oad

s

ITS

Mo

re C

ars

Transit

Bicycling

Walking

Complete Streets

HOV

No Network – BIG ROADS: - Little walking and bicycling

- Less effective transit- Higher VMT

- Higher speeds- More turning movement

- Less safe

Street Network

Connected Network – SMALL ROADS:- More walking and bicycling

- More effective transit - Lower VMT

- Lower speeds- Less turning movement

- More safe

Street Network

2 2

2

2

2

4

66

4

Same Total

Lanes

More Capacity

• VMT

• Turns

• Clearance Time

• Signal Phase

Street Network

800

600

400

200

Ca

pa

city o

f A

dd

itio

na

l

Th

roug

h L

an

e (

VP

H)

Lane Capacity

Park Once District

Street Network: Land Use and Travel Patterns

P

Shop

OfficeSchool

Park

Walk

DrivePark

MOC’s

Park Once District

Street Network: Land Use and Travel Patterns

Sp

ee

d (

MP

H)

60

20

30

40

50

10

0

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000

Hourly Vehicles Per Lane

Maximum Volume 25-

30 Miles Per Hour

Speed / Flow Relationship

30 mph 25 mph

20 mph 15 mph

Design Speed, Geometrics, and Safety

Mismatched –Speed/Access. Both mismatched with Environment

Design Speed, Geometrics, and Safety

Matched –Speed/Access. Both mismatched with Environment

Design Speed, Geometrics, and Safety

Matched – Environment/Speed/Access.

Design Speed, Geometrics, and Safety

▪ Vehicle Travel Lane

▪ Approx. 800 people/hour

▪ Local Bus (15 min. Headway)

▪ Approx. 200 people/hour (Can supplement arterial capacity!)

▪ Enhanced Bus (5 min. Headway)

▪ Approx. 1,200 people/hour

▪ Light Rail (15 min. Headway)

▪ Approx. 2,400 people/hour

Transit Mobility

500 feet

500’

¼-mile

People will walk over ½-mile, within a quality walking environment.

Understand the Pedestrian

Developed by Steve Price

in association w/ Dover Kohl & Partners

& Glatting Jackson

for Johnson City,Tennessee

Understand the Pedestrian

Developed by Steve Price

in association w/ Dover Kohl & Partners

& Glatting Jackson

for Johnson City,Tennessee

Understand the Pedestrian

Understand the Pedestrian

Developed by Steve Price

in association w/ Dover Kohl & Partners

& Glatting Jackson

for Johnson City,Tennessee

Transportation Plan

▪ Needs

▪ Strategies

Ted Ritschard

Project Manager

Existing Conditions

Existing Conditions

Existing ConditionsCurrent Zoning Overview

▪ 245.7 acres zoned as Light Industrial (M-1)

▪ 99.5 acres zoned as General and Intermediate Business (C-6, C-5)

▪ 31.3 acres zoned as Public Facility (PF)

▪ Other zones include R-1, R-2, R-4, R5, PUD, PBC,

28%

57%

3% 7%4% Business

Industrial

Planned UnitDevelopmentPublic Facility

Residential

Existing ConditionsTraffic Operations

Austin Bluffs/Garden of the Gods Intersection

▪ Heavy Left-turn movements (~400 vph) for the EB, WB, and SB approaches

▪ Heavy eastbound/westbound thru-traffic (~1400 vph)

▪ Significant Queuing▪ Traffic model indicates EB LTL

spillover

AM Peak LOS / PM Peak LOS

Existing ConditionsTraffic OperationsOther Intersections▪ Excess Capacity at Mt View

Lane and Winters Drive on Nevada Avenue

▪ Excess Capacity at the Cascade Avenue and Stone Avenue intersections on Fillmore

▪ Fillmore / Nevada approaching poor operations with EB queuing on Fillmore / Nevada spills over west of TejonAvenue

AM Peak LOS / PM Peak LOS

Transportation & Redevelopment▪ Master Plan identifies preferred land-

uses▪ Includes the redevelopment of many of the

existing industrial uses to office, commercial, and residential

▪ Trip generation was performed to evaluate the change in traffic patterns

Austin Bluffs to Mt View Lane

Mt View Lane to Commerce Street

Commerce Street to South of Polk Street

Transportation & RedevelopmentTrip Generation by Land-Use Comparison

▪ Each land-use is unique in terms of how many trips it generates

▪ Redeveloping an existing land-use may have a positive net trip generation (e.g. change from industrial to office use) or a negative change

▪ The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) rates were reference to estimate the potential change in trips for this study

Uses Trip Generation Rate (Daily) Unit

Industrial Trip (Primary Existing Use)6.97 per 1,000 Square Feet

Office Building11.03 per 1,000 Square Feet

Research and Development

(Potential Cyber Security uses)8.11 per 1,000 Square Feet

Specialty Retail Center44.32 per 1,000 Square Feet

Apartments6.65 per Dwelling Unit

Transportation & RedevelopmentOverall Trip Generation Forecast

Transportation & RedevelopmentFuture Forecasted Traffic Operations▪ Overall daily traffic can increase by 52

percent north of Mount View Lane and 39 percent south of Winters Drive (including background traffic growth 0f 0.5 percent per year)

▪ Assuming Nevada Avenue has an estimated capacity of 39,800 vpd, additional lane capacity will be needed north of Winters Drive.

FDOT Generalize Service Volumes

Transportation Strategy Choices

1. Improve Vehicular Capacity on Nevada Avenue

2. Leverage Network Capacity

3. Move People, Not Just Cars

Strategy 1:Improve Nevada Avenue

More

Efficiency

Syste

m

Ma

na

ge

me

nt

ITS

Mo

re C

ars

▪ Improvements can:▪ Increase Efficiency

▪ Enhance Safety

▪ Provide Access Management

▪ Benefits can be immediate and relatively low cost

▪ These can be considered as incremental short-term improvements (0 – 5 years)

Co

nve

ntio

nal A

pp

roa

ch

Improve Nevada Avenue▪ Specific improvements can include:

▪ Strategic closures of median openings and access drives to reduce conflict points

▪ Curb / Gutter / Sidewalk

▪ Traffic signal re-optimization

▪ Dedicated bicycle lanes

▪ Intersection improvements (Mount View Lane, Winters Drive)

Example: Access ManagementExpo Center

Concern:

▪ Existing median opening only serves one parcel

Potential Improvement:

▪ Shift the existing opening to the south and extend the access drive to Cascade

Strategy Benefit:

▪ Provides multi parcel access for more efficiency

▪ Allows for the opportunity to expand the E/W network connectivity

▪ Reduces block sizes (Increases walkability and fits the desired character)

▪ Well managed arterials are often 40-50 percent safer (FHWA)

Close Median Opening

Example: Access Management

Significant Investments for Significant Change▪ Adding Lanes

▪ Improvements to Austin Bluffs/Garden of the Gods Intersection▪ Alternative/innovative intersection

▪ Interchange

1.04

0.74

0.85

Displaced Left Turn

Restricted Crossing U-Turn

3.1

3.2

3.3

2

4.2

5

3525

1298

608

6.2 E-W

6.1 N-S

2.29

0.70

Partial Displaced Left Turn 7244.1 N-S

3.4

Median U-Turn

883

1517

3664

1.29

0.96

0.96

1113

1537

0.77

0.60

0.62

0.48

0.65

0.81

0.65

1.29

1 1.17 11FULL

S-W

N-E

S-EQuadrant Roadway

CSRL

E-W

FULL

1968

716

3039

1298

Conventional

Conventional Shared RT LN

Results for Intersections

0.70

3

14

1

2.06

4

6

0.87

5

0.94

0.93

1391

0.78

0.93

90.97

10

2

N-W

1182

1364

0.74608

716 667

16711340

7.1 N-S

1629

7.2 E-W

1046

996 1239

771 956

78.1 N-S

13

8.2 E-WPartial Median U-Turn

1046

7

1537

12

15

2307

2.29

1.441.44

0.96

0.96

0.90

0.85

0.67

0.94

1.04

0.770.77

0.84

0.45 0.38

0.45

0.45

1.90

0.81

0.42

0.42

2.06

1494

2071

0.55

0.95

RankingSheetTYPE OF INTERSECTION#CLV V/CCLV V/C CLV V/C CLV V/C CLV V/C

Z o ne 1

( N o rt h )

Z o ne 2

( S o ut h )

Z o ne 3

( E a s t )

Z o ne 4

( W e s t )

Z o ne 5

( C e nt e r) Overall v/c

Ratio

1441

0.85

0.70

0.87

1876 1.17

1126

0.93

1251

1494

1556 0.97

0.38

1.23

667

3293

1.02

1362 1500

1078

1227 1227

2.20

BenefitsFHWA Intersection Type Matrix (CAP-X)

Example: Continuous Flow Intersection

▪ Similar to one being currently constructed at Woodmen and Union

▪ Provides enhanced LOS where there are significant left turning movements

▪ Limits access near intersection

Strategy 2: Leverage Network Vehicle Capacity

▪ Enhance network connectivity to better use available capacity

▪ Also creates opportunities to decrease block size and improve the pedestrian/bicycle environment by connecting to existing trail systems

Mixture of Uses

Road NetworkPedestrian-Oriented Environment

Compact Development

ImplementationDetails

ImplementationDetails

Restore Monument Creek Bridge

Potential Intersection Improvements

Northwest Creek Side Road

Extend Cascade Avenue; Require Bridge over Templeton Gap

Floodway

Improve Cascade Streetscape (3-lane cross section, sidewalks, Bicycle lane)

Potential Intersection Improvements

Potential Intersection Improvements

Potential Traffic Signal

Potential Intersection Improvements

Combined Traffic BenefitsFuture Forecasted Traffic Operations▪ It is estimated that approximately 4,000 –

5,000 daily trips can be diverted to Mark Dabling Boulevard and Cascade Avenue.

▪ Overall daily traffic growth is reduced on Nevada by 19 percent north of Mount View Lane and 14 percent south of Winters Drive (includes background traffic growth 0f 0.5 percent per year)

▪ Intersection performance increases at Mount View Lane, Winters Drive, and Fillmore Street.

Additional ConnectionsBlock Building – As redevelopment occurs

Identify opportunities to build pedestrian friendly blocks

More streets connect to Nevada with regular signal spacing and fewer driveways

Strategy 3: Move More People, Not Just Cars

▪ Position Nevada Avenue for high frequency transit service

▪ Expand pedestrian/bicycle infrastructure (trail system)

Lateral Approach

Transit

Bicycling

Walking

HOV/HOT Lanes

Transit Layout

Transit Implementation

Bridge Crossing Rock Island Trail

Trail Implementation

▪ Nevada Avenue multi-use trail

▪ Enhance connectivity to Pikes Peak Greenway trail using new roadway bridges over Templeton Gap and Monument Creek

Trail Layout

Summary

▪ Transportation Choices Exist

▪ These Choices can support the Vision of the Master Plan

▪ How we choose to move shapes more than the facilities we use

Questions or Clarifications

▪ Preparation for small group activities

Small Group Instructions

1. Review and discuss as a group each of the three strategies.

2. Decide as a group what excites you about each strategy and what concerns you about each strategy. List that on the blue group response form in the middle of your table. Be as specific as you can with your responses.

3. If you have questions, raise your hand and a resource person will come to assist you.

4. Choose someone in your group to report out your work once all groups have finished.

5. Please complete your individual response form.

Wrap-Up and Next Steps

▪ Reminders▪ Individual response form on your way out▪ Please sign in so we can keep you posted▪ Responses from tonight will be on the website – address on your agenda

▪ Open House

▪ View and comment on the recommended Transportation Sub-Plan

▪ Learn more about the zoning overlay recommendations to be submitted to City Council

▪ Thank you and good night