SH 392 ALTERNATIVES REVIEW

Transcription

1 SH 392 ALTERNATIVES REVIEW Prepared for: Town of Windsor 301 Walnut Street Windsor, CO Prepared by: Felsburg Holt & Ullevig 6300 South Syracuse Way, Suite 600 Centennial, CO / FHU Reference No November 2006

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION SUMMARY OF COMMUNITY COMMENTS SUPPLEMENTAL REVIEW OF TRAVEL PATTERNS SH 392 Origin-Destination Analysis Travel Between Fort Collins and Greeley Truck Activity in Windsor ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION North Front Range Model Baseline Enhanced Baseline Crossroads Boulevard as a 4-Lane Arterial WCR 74 as a 4-Lane Arterial Crossroads Boulevard and WCR 74 both as 4-Lane Arterials Environmental Overview Study - North SH 392 Bypass Alternative Summary of Alternatives Effects on SH 392 Traffic in Downtown EVALUATION SUMMARY IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES APPENDIX Felsburg Holt & Ullevig

3 LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1. Environmental Overview Study Alternatives Screening Figure 2. Origin-Destination Analysis Districts Figure 3. Origin-Destination Patterns SH 392 through Downtown Windsor Figure 4. Travel between Fort Collins Area and Greeley Area Figure Traffic Forecast Comparison Figure 6. Comprehensive Plan Roadway Classifications LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Summary of Alternatives Effects on SH 392 Traffic in Downtown Felsburg Holt & Ullevig

4 INTRODUCTION In the spring of 2006, the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) completed an Environmental Overview Study (EOS) of the State Highway 392 (SH 392) corridor from US 287 in Loveland on the west to Weld County Road 23 (WCR 23) on the east. Eight agencies in addition to CDOT were involved in the EOS study, including the municipalities of Windsor, Fort Collins, Loveland, Greeley, Severance; Larimer and Weld Counties; and the North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization (NFRMPO). An EOS is a planning study that is intended to evaluate future transportation solutions and their environmental effects. An EOS can be referred to as a pre-nepa study, meaning that prior to using federal funds for a major corridor improvement, a study complying with the National Environmental Policy Act would need to be completed. The EOS evaluated a range of alternatives, and CDOT has recommended focusing future efforts on three general alternatives, shown on the following EOS graphic (Figure 1), including: No Action 4-Lane SH 392 on its current alignment, with on-street parking removed through downtown Windsor (Main Street) A new arterial alignment north of downtown Windsor, using the WCR 70 alignment. Due to the vital importance of SH 392 for mobility and access in the Town of Windsor, the Town Board and Planning Commission felt that additional discussion and analysis were needed to ensure that all reasonable alternatives have been explored fully. The Town engaged Felsburg Holt & Ullevig to work with Town staff to fully understand the Town s goals, questions, and concerns about the SH 392 corridor; to take an expansive and comprehensive view of potential alternatives; and to fully address Town questions and concerns about potential alternatives. The ultimate objective of this project is to bring closure to SH 392 corridor issues from the Town s perspective. This report is presented in six sections: INTRODUCTION summarizes the background and purpose of the project; SUMMARY OF COMMUNITY COMMENTS summarizes the comments received at a Town Board and Planning Commission Workshop and at meetings with Windsor Estates residents and with downtown business and property owners; REVIEW OF TRAVEL PATTERNS summarizes the evaluation of corridor and area travel patterns using the NFRMPO regional travel demand model; ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION presents traffic forecasts and other evaluations of various SH 392 and other corridor improvement alternatives; EVALUATION SUMMARY provides a summary of conclusions that can be drawn from the analyses presented; and IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES outlines suggested planning strategies to be pursued by the Town. Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Page 1

5 TOWN of WINDSOR - SH 392 ALTERN TERNATIVES TIVES REVIEW Environmental Overview Study - Alternatives Screening FELSBUR SBURG G HOLT T & ULLEVIG Figure 1 TOWN OF WINDSOR

6 SUMMARY OF COMMUNITY COMMENTS Three meetings were held early in the process to elicit comments and questions from Town officials and affected residents and property owners. These comments and questions were instrumental in scoping this review of the alternatives. A brief summary of comments from each of these meetings is provided below, and more detailed meeting notes and attendance lists are provided in the Appendix. Town Board and Planning Commission Workshop, July 17, 2006 Several Board and Commission members are not convinced that the SH 392 bypass alternative using the WCR 70 alignment would provide benefits commensurate with the cost and impacts. There was concern expressed about the effects of removing parking from SH 392 through downtown. Staff and consultants were directed to solicit input from downtown business and property owners. Several Board and Commission members expressed the need to look more expansively at alternatives to accommodate growing travel demands, including looking at other corridors to the north and south of Windsor, considering a package of smaller roadway improvements (including north-south as well as east-west section line roads) as an alternative to a single state highway route, and other travel modes. There were comments emphasizing the impact specifically of truck traffic on SH 392. Because of growing travel demand and its vital importance to Windsor s future, the issue of SH 392 s future is one of Windsor s most important issues. It is important for a longterm plan to be in place. Windsor Estates Residents, July 27, 2006 Residents expressed general acceptance of developing WCR 70 as an improved twolane road to be part of Windsor s street system, but would not endorse developing a state highway route or major arterial street there. Residents echoed Town Board and Planning Commission comments about the need to look at other east-west corridors north and south of the SH 392 corridor. Downtown Property and Business Owners, September 21, 2006 The angled, on-street parking is very important to downtown businesses. Representatives would not favor eliminating any parking. If on-street parking were to be reduced, it would be necessary to have a replacement parking program in place first to maintain the viability of downtown. The group agreed that improvements to the Town s street grid system and other corridors should be pursued further as an alternative to widening SH 392 downtown. Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Page 3

7 SUPPLEMENTAL REVIEW OF TRAVEL PATTERNS The travel pattern analysis prepared as part of the EOS process was supplemented for this study in two ways. First, origin-destination information, which was presented in the EOS by estimating the proportion of trip ends from different parts of the region, has been presented to depict the full trip paths so that, for example, the number of trips traveling between Greeley and Fort Collins using SH 392 can be estimated. Second, east-west travel patterns were viewed for a larger set of routes in addition to SH 392, including US 34, Crossroads Boulevard, and WCR 74. These supplemental analyses, like those from the EOS process, used the North Front Range 2030 regional travel model. SH 392 Origin-Destination Analysis To analyze the origins and destinations of trips using SH 392 and other roads, the North Front Range model area was divided into eight districts, as shown on Figure 2. District 1 represents the Town of Windsor and its planning area. Figure 3 depicts the major origin-destination pairs that comprise the 28,200 vehicles per day forecasted to use SH 392 in downtown Windsor in 2030, based on the baseline NFR 2030 traffic forecasting model. The analysis shows that: More than half (53%) of trips on SH 392 begin and/or end in the Town of Windsor. This 53% includes 8% that both begin and end in Windsor, 27% traveling between Windsor and areas to the west, and 18% traveling between Windsor and areas to the east. An estimated 36% of the trips on SH 392 are east-west through trips, traveling between the Greeley area on the east and either the Fort Collins area (24%) or the Loveland/Central Larimer County area (12%) on the west. The remaining 11% of trips travel between other districts, including approximately 4% that are using SH 392 through downtown as part of the SH 257 route to travel northsouth through Windsor. Travel Between Fort Collins and Greeley As shown on Figure 4, the travel demand model projects that in 2030 a total of 17,900 daily vehicle trips will travel between the Fort Collins area and the Greeley area (areas 5 and 2, as shown on Figure 2). Measuring traffic in the middle of the trip, between WCR 17 and WCR 19, the data show the following findings: The most used route for travel between the Fort Collins and Greeley areas is SH 392, carrying approximately 38% of the traffic. US 34 carries approximately 23% of the traffic. Compared with SH 392, US 34 has higher travel speeds but also is less direct for trips to and from Greeley north of US 34. Crossroads Boulevard and WCR 74 carry a combined 9% of the traffic, with small utilization due to their relatively slow travel speeds and, in the case of Crossroads Boulevard, lack of continuity across the entire route. Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Page 4

8 TOWN of WINDSOR - SH 392 ALTERN TERNATIVES TIVES REVIEW Origin - Destination Analysis Districts Windsor Fort Collins / North Larimer County Central Larimer County Loveland / Central Larimer County Greeley / Evans / Central Weld County Southern Larimer County Southern Weld County Northern Weld County 2 8 WCR 74 4 US SH 257 Crossroads Blvd. SH 392 US FELSBUR SBURG G HOLT T & ULLEVIG Figure 2 TOWN OF WINDSOR

9 TOWN of WINDSOR - SH 392 ALTERN TERNATIVES TIVES REVIEW Origin-Destination Patterns on SH 392 through Downtown Windsor (Based on Forecasted 2030 Daily Traffic) North-South 257 Traffic 4% 2 25 Greeley - Fort Collins 24% Other Through Trips 7% Selected Link Total - 28,200 vpd 8 Greeley - Loveland/ Central Larimer 12% SH Internal Windsor 8% Windsor - West 27% Windsor - East 18% FELSBUR SBURG G HOLT T & ULLEVIG Figure 3 TOWN OF WINDSOR

10 TOWN of WINDSOR - SH 392 ALTERN TERNATIVES TIVES REVIEW Routes Used for Travel Between Fort Collins Area and Greeley Area (Based on Forecasted 2030 Daily Traffic) 25 Other 30% 2 FORT COLLINS AREA Total: 17,900 8 WCR 74 6% 4 3 SH % 1 Crossroads 3% SH GREELEY AREA US 34 23% FELSBUR SBURG G HOLT T & ULLEVIG Figure 4 TOWN OF WINDSOR

11 The remaining approximately 30% of travel between the Fort Collins and Greeley areas uses other routes, including various collector roads and northern paths reached via US 85 north of Greeley. Truck Activity in Windsor According to CDOT data, SH 392 carries approximately 200 multi-unit trucks and 700 single-unit trucks per day in the road segment between I-25 and SH 257 east. This translates to approximately 5% of all traffic being single or multi-unit trucks. SH 257 north and south of SH 392 carries similar numbers of trucks, which represents a larger percentage of total traffic on SH 257. Town staff contacted ten Windsor businesses that are significant generators of truck traffic, and asked them to estimate the numbers of daily truck trips that they generate and in which direction they travel. The largest generators are Front Range Energy, Kodak, Universal Forest Products, and Transportation Management Systems (all located along or near SH 257 in the southern part of Windsor); Bestway Concrete Co. (located along SH 392 in the western part of Windsor); and Owens-Illinois (located to the east of Windsor). Each of these businesses is estimated to generate in the range of 30 to 60 truck trips per day. The total estimated truck trip generation of the ten businesses surveyed is 250 to 400 trucks per day, with a relatively even distribution to the north, south, east, and west. Based on this informal survey of local businesses and the assumption that other local businesses add somewhat to the local truck trip generation, it appears that somewhere between one quarter and one half of the truck traffic observed on SH 392 and SH 257 in Windsor is generated by local businesses. Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Page 8

12 ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION Based on the comments received and analyses performed, both described in previous sections, several alternatives were developed and evaluated to supplement the alternatives evaluation performed in the SH 392 EOS. The NFR 2030 traffic forecasting model was used to forecast eight different scenarios. Figure 5 provides a comparison of 2030 daily traffic forecasts with five of these scenarios (the other three model runs are variations of the five scenarios and forecast differences are described in the text). Descriptions of the five alternatives and summaries of the results of the traffic forecasting model runs (including the other three variations modeled) are discussed in the following sections. In the descriptions of alternatives, the five basic roadway classifications used in the traffic forecasting model are referenced. Following are the five classifications listed in descending order of their speed and capacity characteristics: Freeway High speed roads intended to serve regional travel, with access provided by grade-separated interchanges. Expressway The second highest speed classification intended to primarily serve regional travel, with access provided by a combination of grade-separated interchanges and at-grade intersections. Principal Arterial Moderately high speed roads intended to serve regional and subregional functions, with access provided by at-grade intersections. Minor Arterial Moderate speed roads generally serving sub-regional functions and providing some access to adjacent land uses, with access provided by at-grade intersections. Collector Streets The lowest speed and capacity roads included in the traffic forecasting model, serving largely local access functions with at-grade intersections. North Front Range Model Baseline This Baseline run is based on the roadway network currently in the North Front Range regional model. The network in the model reflects the North Front Range s fiscally constrained Regional Transportation Plan. Key roadway assumptions in the baseline network include: US 34 4-lane Expressway between I-25 and Greeley Crossroads Boulevard 4-lane Principal Arterial 1.5 miles east of I-25; 2-lane Collector east of that to its eastern terminus at SH 257/WCR 17 SH 392 A Principal Arterial between I-25 and US 85, 2-lanes except for existing 4-lane sections between I-25 and downtown Windsor WCR 74 A 2-lane Minor Arterial between I-25 and US 85 Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Page 9

13 TOWN of WINDSOR - SH 392 ALTERN TERNATIVES TIVES REVIEW 2030 Traffic Forecast Comparison WCR 74 (Harmony Rd.) 14,600 15,300 14,500 30,300 28,600 9,700 10,500 9,900 14,100 13,400 SH 392 (Main St.) WCR 13 10,000 7,100 7,000 9,300 9,000 WCR 15 SH 257 WCR ,800 5,900 8,000 7,100 WCR 19 1,500 6,700 6,100 8,600 7, ,800 29,700 25,800 26,300 23,000 3,900 5,500 29,700 5,100 28,000 28,200 23,400 17,800 21,900 16,000 7,900 6,400 3,700 6,400 3,500 WCR 17 3,500 7,200 28,700 6,700 27,900 SH ,900 14,500 15,600 15,200 15,900 Crossroads Blvd. US 34 63,100 62,500 53,000 60,700 51,400 69,500 67,300 62,000 66,500 61,600 SH 257 US 34 Bypass US 34 E LEGEND = County/Town Roads = State/US Highways FELSBUR SBURG G HOLT T & ULLEVIG XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX = Baseline NFR Model = Enhanced Baseline = Crossroads Blvd. 4-Lane Principal Arterial = WCR 74 4-Lane Principal Arterial = Crossroads & WCR 74 4-Lane Principal Arterials Figure 5 TOWN OF WINDSOR

14 Baseline forecasts are shown as the top numbers on Figure 5. These forecasts are the ones used for the origin-destination information presented in the previous section, and are also comparable to the baseline or No Action forecasts displayed for the EOS. These baseline forecasts are approximately double or more compared with the existing traffic volumes on SH 392, US 34 and WCR 74. Enhanced Baseline The Enhanced Baseline roadway network was developed to provide a better reflection of the Town s roadway plan than the regional model provides. Figure 6 shows the Town of Windsor s Comprehensive Plan Roadway Classifications. Major modifications to the Baseline roadway network that were incorporated in the Enhanced Baseline network include: Upgrade WCR 19, between SH 392 and WCR 70, from a Collector to a Minor Arterial; Add a 2-lane road along the WCR 70 alignment, as a Minor Arterial between WCR 19 and WCR 17/SH 257 and as a Collector between WCR 17/SH 257 and WCR 15; Straighten the alignment of the two-lane WCR 74 between WCR 17/SH 257 and WCR 19, to reflect recent upgrades; and Straighten the alignment of the two-lane Crossroads Boulevard between WCR 17 and WCR 19/SH 257, to reflect current roadway improvement plans. Since these enhancements are already part of Windsor s roadway plan, they were carried forward for each of the alternative model runs described below. Enhanced Baseline forecasts are shown as the second set of numbers on Figure 5. The primary change from these network enhancements is the 6,800 vehicles per day (vpd) forecasted to use WCR 70 between WCR 17/SH 257 and WCR 19. The upgrade of WCR 19 to a Minor Arterial, coupled with the presence of WCR 70, would increase the traffic forecast on WCR 19 north of SH 392 from 1,500 vpd to 6,700 vpd. These enhancements to the local network would also reduce projected traffic on SH 392 through downtown Windsor by nearly 5,000 vpd. Another variation on this Enhanced Baseline scenario was modeled: with the WCR 19 upgrade to a Minor Arterial extended beyond WCR 70 to WCR 74. This variation attracted more traffic to the WCR 19 alignment north of WCR 70, but it did not produce significant additional relief to SH 392 compared with the original Enhanced Baseline scenario. Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Page 11

15 TOWN of WINDSOR - SH 392 ALTERN TERNATIVES TIVES REVIEW Comprehensive Plan Roadway Classifications FELSBUR SBURG G HOLT T & ULLEVIG Figure 6 TOWN OF WINDSOR

16 Crossroads Boulevard as a 4-Lane Arterial In addition to the Enhanced Baseline improvements, this scenario included an upgrade of Crossroads Boulevard to a 4-lane Principal Arterial from I-25 to SH 257. These forecasts are shown as the middle set of numbers on Figure 5. The improvements result in increases of more than 20,000 vpd on the improved Crossroads Boulevard to between 28,000 and 30,000 vpd. Crossroads improvements would result in further reductions of 4,000 to 6,000 vpd on SH 392 through Windsor. Other reductions are seen on US 34 and minor Weld County Roads both north and south of Crossroads Boulevard. Another model run was performed with Crossroads Boulevard improved only to the level of a 2-lane Minor Arterial. These model results, not displayed on Figure 5, showed approximately a third of the traffic increases on Crossroads Boulevard and a third of the associated relief to SH 392 (about 2,000 vpd reduction) as compared with the 4-lane Principal Arterial forecasts. WCR 74 as a 4-Lane Arterial This model run included upgrading WCR 74 (Harmony Road) to a 4-lane Principal Arterial between I-25 and SH 257, as well as the Enhanced Baseline improvements. These forecasts are shown as the fourth set of numbers on Figure 5. The improvements result in nearly a doubling of traffic on WCR 74 between I-25 and SH 257, from 15,300 vpd with the Enhanced Baseline to more than 30,000 vpd. A 3,600 vpd increase is projected on WCR 74 east of SH 257, from 10,500 vpd with the Enhanced Baseline to 14,100 vpd. WCR 74 improvements would result in more than a 3,000 vpd reduction on SH 392 west of downtown Windsor, but only a 1,500 vpd reduction on SH 392 through downtown Windsor. Crossroads Boulevard and WCR 74 both as 4-Lane Arterials This model run includes upgrading both Crossroads Boulevard and WCR 74 to 4-lane Principal Arterials between I-25 and SH 257. These forecasts are shown as the bottom set of numbers on Figure 5. The result of these improvements is a reduction from 23,400 vpd with the Enhanced Baseline to 16,000 vpd on SH 392 through downtown Windsor. With this alternative, Crossroads Boulevard would carry a larger share of the Greeley-Fort Collins through traffic (nearly 30%) than would SH 392 (less than 25%). Another model run was performed, also with Crossroads Boulevard and WCR 74 improved to 4-lane Principal Arterials as described above, but with Crossroads Boulevard connected to O Street in Greeley as a Principal Arterial. These model results, not displayed on Figure 5, showed significant traffic using the O Street connection (15,000 to 20,000 vpd) and increases on Crossroads Boulevard south of Windsor. However, the O Street connection only provided negligible additional relief to SH 392 through downtown Windsor. Because of the northeastsouthwest orientation of the Crossroads/O Street connection, it would primarily draw traffic coming from or going to the southwest and would primarily relieve US 34. Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Page 13

17 Environmental Overview Study - North SH 392 Bypass Alternative As shown on Figure 1, the SH 392 bypass option that passed through the EOS screening process for further consideration is a bypass route north of SH 392 using the WCR 70 alignment between WCR 13 and WCR 19. The bypass would connect back to SH 392 using WCR 13 on the west and via a new diagonal roadway on the east connecting from WCR 19/WCR 70 to join SH 392 near WCR 23. EOS forecasts show 10,000 to 16,000 vpd using this bypass, with a reduction in traffic on SH 392 through downtown Windsor of approximately 5,000 vpd to a level of 21,000 vpd. Summary of Alternatives Effects on SH 392 Traffic in Downtown Table 1 provides a summary of the forecasted reductions in traffic on SH 392 in downtown Windsor that are associated with different improvements evaluated in this report, as well as the EOS northern bypass option. Table 1. Summary of Alternatives Effects on SH 392 Traffic in Downtown 2030 Modeling Scenario Daily Traffic Forecasts on SH 392 in Downtown Windsor (Vehicles per Day) Reduction Compared with NFR Model Baseline (Vehicles per Day) North Front Range Model Baseline 28,200 N/A Enhanced Baseline (including 2-lane WCR 70) 23,400-4,800 Crossroads Blvd. as a 4-Lane Arterial 17,800-10,400 WCR 74 as a 4-Lane Principal Arterial 21,900-6,300 Crossroads & WCR 74 as a 4-Lane Principal Arterial 16,000-12,200 EOS Alternative with North Bypass 21,000-5,000* * Reduction compared with EOS baseline forecasts of 26,000 vpd This comparison shows that relief to SH 392 traffic through downtown would occur with the Enhanced Baseline improvements, primarily due to the construction of a 2-lane WCR 70 connection between WCR 17 and WCR 19. Note that the subsequent four scenarios listed on Table 1 carry the Enhanced Baseline improvements forward. Improving Crossroads Boulevard to a 4-lane arterial between I-25 and SH 257 (the third scenario shown on the table) would provide the greatest incremental relief of the improvements tested, with a total reduction of 10,400 vpd compared with the Baseline (or 5,600 vpd incremental reduction compared with the Enhanced Baseline). Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Page 14

18 The WCR 74 improvement would provide less incremental reduction on SH 392 than would improvements to Crossroads Boulevard, but it would contribute an additional 1,800 vpd relief when combined with the Crossroads Boulevard improvements. The northern bypass route evaluated as part of the EOS process is forecasted to provide relief of approximately 5,000 vpd on SH 392, but the relief is only slightly greater than that associated with the more minor 2-lane improvement to WCR 70 that is included in the Enhanced Baseline scenario. Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Page 15

19 EVALUATION SUMMARY The analysis presented in this report leads to the following conclusions: Without implementation of major roadway system improvements, SH 392 will carry a large share (estimated at 38%) of the traffic between the Greeley and Fort Collins areas. This Fort Collins-Greeley through traffic, in addition to Greeley-Loveland area through traffic, constitutes more than a third of SH 392 traffic forecasts. Of the major routes available to carry this through traffic, SH 392 through downtown Windsor is the most physically constrained route. Completion of the planned connection of WCR 70 between WCR 15 and WCR 19 would create another option for circulation within Windsor and for connecting between the part of the SH 257 corridor along the WCR 17 north of SH 392 and along WCR 19 south of SH 392, reducing demands on SH 392 through downtown. Improving Crossroads Boulevard between I-25 and SH 257 to a 4-lane Principal Arterial, similar to its current configuration immediately east of I-25, would make Crossroads Boulevard the largest carrier of Greeley-Fort Collins through-traffic and would reduce SH 392 traffic through downtown Windsor substantially (by more than 5,000 vehicles per day). The connection of Crossroads Boulevard to O Street in Greeley would capture a substantial volume of traffic, but would not have a major effect on demand for SH 392 through Windsor. Improving WCR 74 between I-25 and SH 257 to a 4-lane Principal Arterial would capture substantial travel demand, but the relief afforded by this improvement would be much less targeted to SH 392 through downtown Windsor (a 1,500 vpd reduction) compared with Crossroads Boulevard. With the completion of WCR 70 and improvements to Crossroads Boulevard and WCR 74, the 2030 forecast on SH 392 through downtown Windsor would be reduced from approximately 28,000 vpd with no action to approximately 16,000 vpd. This 16,000 vpd traffic level approximates the traditional capacity limit for a well-designed 2-lane road. Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Page 16

20 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES Based on the analysis and conclusions presented in this review, the Town should continue to work with CDOT to plan for the implementation of four lanes on SH 392 from the western edge of downtown to I-25. To address the concerns of the downtown businesses and the issues related to the potential bypass, an outline of potential planning strategies to deal with travel demand in the SH 392 corridor in the downtown area has been prepared for the Town to consider. Strategy - Continued Implementation of the Windsor Transportation Study Description: The Town should continue to implement its roadway plan to develop a more complete grid of generally mile-spaced arterial and collector roads throughout the Town. In addition to Crossroads Boulevard discussed below, three segments of the roadway system provide the most direct relief to SH 392 through downtown: WCR 70 between WCR 19 and WCR 17 (SH 257), which should be developed as a 2- lane minor arterial street. Enhancements to WCR 19 north of SH 392. Further evaluations may be needed to formulate a Town policy concerning potential shifting of the SH 257 designation north of SH 392 from the WCR 17 alignment to the WCR 19 alignment. Improve WCR 74/Harmony Road to 4-lane arterial standards between I-25 and SH 257, in coordination with Larimer and Weld Counties and Timnath. Implementation: Development of Windsor s roadway plan should continue to take place as development occurs and as funding becomes available. Improvements to WCR 19 north of SH 392 and to WCR 70 between WCR 17 and WCR 19 are the highest priorities relative to relief for SH 392 through downtown. Strategy - Crossroads Boulevard Improvements Description: Traffic forecasting has shown substantial benefits to the SH 392 corridor through Windsor from improvements to Crossroads Boulevard. Windsor should continue cooperation among the Town, Larimer and Weld Counties, and adjacent development to complete improvements to create a continuous 4-lane arterial street between I-25 and SH 257. The extension of Crossroads Boulevard farther east to connect with O Street in Greeley appears to be a beneficial project for regional mobility, but it is not as directly tied to SH 392 relief as is the section between I-25 and SH 257. Implementation: Completion of improvements from I-25 to SH 257 should be a short-range priority for Windsor. Extension east to connect with O Street is a less immediate priority for the Town. Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Page 17

21 Strategy Downtown Main Street Improvement Planning Description: Traffic forecasts for 2030 on Main Street through downtown, with implementation of other strategies, would be near the capacity of a 2-lane arterial roadway. A plan should be developed and implemented to maintain the safety and functionality of Main Street as a 2-lane arterial, and to plan for the potential long-range pressure, near or beyond 2030, to widen to four lanes. Potential elements of a Main Street improvement strategy include: Continued implementation of access management strategies on Main Street, as opportunities arise Pedestrian crossing enhancements, particularly in school zones A parking plan to supplement on-street parking with additional side street and off-street parking, which may include surface or structured parking Implementation: Main Street improvement planning should begin in the short range. Strategy - Truck Routing Description: Work with the Town s major truck traffic generators to encourage use of alternative routes, such as Crossroads Boulevard, WCR 19, and WCR 74 as they are improved per strategies discussed above. Implementation: Coordination can take place during the development review process for new uses and on an ongoing basis with existing truck traffic generators. Work with the Town of Severance to address the WCR 23/WCR 22.8 offset at SH 392 to facilitate truck movements along the WCR 23 route and to enhance access to the industrial park. Strategy - Regional Transit Planning Description: Development of transit service between Greeley and Fort Collins and between Greeley and Loveland could reduce vehicle demand on SH 392 through Windsor. Transit service could take a variety of forms using bus or rail transit. The Town has recently participated in the development of the Johnstown, Milliken and Windsor Short-Range Transit Plan, which identified intercity bus routes and a Call and Ride service. This service would provide a base upon which future expanded service could build. Implementation: Windsor should continue to participate in regional transit planning efforts along with other municipal, county, and regional jurisdictions. As roadways are improved, the designs should incorporate elements which would support transit services along the roadways. Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Page 18

22 APPENDIX Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Appendix

23 TOWN OF WINDSOR SH 392 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS FHU Reference No Town Board/Planning Commission Workshop Workshop Summary - July 17, 2006 A joint Windsor Town Board and Planning Commission workshop was held at 6:00 pm, July 17, 2006 to kick-off the Town s alternatives analysis process. The agenda, sign-in sheets, and exhibits for the meeting are attached. The Mayor opened the meeting, then Rod Wensing and Bob Felsburg described the SH 392 Environmental Overview Study (EOS) process and the scope for the Town s study. The study is intended to build upon the planning that has occurred through the EOS process, and to provide additional analysis needed by the Town to formulate its position on the future of the SH 392 corridor in Windsor. For the remainder of the 90 minute discussion, Planning Commission members, Town Board members, and Town staff provided comments concerning: Objectives for the study; Needed Information to help; and Options / Alternatives that should be explored further. Following are summaries of the key points made. Where appropriate, responses to questions by staff and consultants are shown in italics. Planning Commission Comments 1. Who is the ultimate decision-maker? Since it is under state jurisdiction, CDOT has the ultimate authority for SH 392. What does past experience show about how open CDOT is to local input? 2. The EOS showed that the by-pass would only take a small percentage of traffic off of SH 392. Is it really worthwhile? 3. Reducing trucks through downtown is really the key. Need more information on the trucks that would use the by-pass. 4. Why was use of CR 74 as an alternate route eliminated from the EOS? Could it significantly reduce trucks through downtown? 5. Bicycle and pedestrian movements should be considered in the study. 6. Should consider swapping state highway designations make CR 19 the state highway rather than the current SH 257 north of SH 392.

24 Town Board/Planning Commission Workshop Workshop Summary July 17, 2006 Page 2 7. Should look at a wider range of potential alternatives: Improve CR 70 but keep to a 30 to 35 mph street Light rail Guide signing improvements 8. Need to engage downtown businesses more than was done in the EOS process. 9. Look at the larger regional setting, including inter-city transit as part of the solution. 10. Take a harder look at No Action (no by-pass and no major changes on SH 392 downtown), but make better use of other existing and planned streets. Town Board Comments 1. The by-pass won t work. Analysis has shown that it doesn t take much traffic off of SH 392. Origin-destination information showed that what is needed is an alternative route between Greeley and Fort Collins. We need to get a better handle on the demand between Greeley and Fort Collins. 2. Should leave SH 392 as is through Windsor, between about CR 15 and CR Agree with earlier comments that trucks are the biggest concern on SH 392 through downtown and that a state highway switch between CR 19 and existing SH 257 should be considered. 4. Improvements to the CR 19/CR 74 intersection and other intersections would encourage trucks to divert to CR 74 and other routes. 5. Restrictions on truck use of SH 392 should be considered. 6. Some Improvements to CR 74 are already planned. These and other improvements could encourage its use and relieve demand on SH The recent newspaper story about back in diagonal parking is interesting. We should look into it and see if it has any merit for Windsor. 8. Should look at improvements to north-south routes to encourage traffic, especially trucks, to use US 34, Crossroads Boulevard, and CR If it ends up that SH 392 is widened and parking removed, some off-street parking would be needed. 10. The EOS focused only on major, long-term solutions. We should also look at short-range improvements that would help alleviate traffic problems. 11. Not sure we want to discourage automobile traffic through downtown; downtown businesses rely on traffic exposure.

25 Town Board/Planning Commission Workshop Workshop Summary July 17, 2006 Page The Town can t put restrictions on trucks on SH 392 without authorization from CDOT. 13. The Town Board members are not traffic expects. Need the expertise from consultant for honest assessments of what would and would not work. 14. Implementing an alternative route would require a partnership between CDOT and the Town. 15. Relative to comments about light rail and regional routes, be careful of scope creep. The study should keep focused on what is most important to Windsor. 16. Don t overstate the concern about only trucks. Growth in all traffic through downtown is a concern. Also, growth won t stop at Town staff has estimated that the potential build-out of the Town and growth management area would support population about four times today s. 17. We may ultimately need more than one alternative route, for example CR 74 and a SH 392 by-pass. 18. We need to act on future needs now before the best options are foreclosed. 19. The SH 392 issue is the most important issue for the Town s long-term future. 20. Make sure that the elimination of the one-way pair alternative was a sound decision. 21. Consider roundabouts on SH 392 as a way to accommodate traffic while discouraging trucks. 22. Consider use of the existing rail corridor between Greeley and Fort Collins for a regional roadway or transit corridor. 23. Truckers insurance encourages use of state highways. 24. Test the O Street extension to Crossroads Boulevard. Town Staff Comments 1. This will be a concurrent but separate effort with the I-25/SH 392 interchange reconstruction project. The interchange project is being organized and it requires cooperation of CDOT, the Metropolitan Planning Organization, and jurisdictions in all four quadrant of the interchange. 2. The Town can discuss swapping of state highways, but we need to remember that CDOT policy does not allow for any net new state highway mileage.

26 AGENDA Overview of SH 392 EOS Scope of this Planning Effort Your Input Objectives Needed Information Options / Alternatives

27 TASK 1 Town Board/ Planning Commission Workshop TASK 2 Supplemental Travel Demand Analysis TASK 3 Alternatives Identification & Evaluation Review EOS Alternatives Identify New or Modified Alternatives Conduct Analyses of Alternatives TASK 4 Document Findings & Conduct 2nd Workshop

28 ENVIRONMENTAL OVERVIEW 392STUDY Initial Screening Results

29 ENVIRONMENTAL OVERVIEW 392STUDY Qualitative Screening Results

30

31

32

33

34

35

36 July 28, 2006 MEETING NOTES Meeting with Windsor Estates HOA July 27, 2006 Re: SH 392 EOS FHU Reference # Bob Felsburg met with residents of Windsor Estates to give them an opportunity to express their thoughts on the SH 392 EOS and their interests in our current work for the Town. An attendance sheet is attached. The following were comments heard at the meeting: 1. Schools have a big impact on traffic issues on SH 392 in the downtown area. How is school-related traffic accounted for in the data (both existing and future)? 2. CR 74 was closed for construction activity in Timnath. While this occurred, there was considerably more truck traffic in Windsor. 3. We should meet with the truck operators to better understand why they use certain routes and what opportunities might exist for alternatives to SH 392. Specifically mentioned were Owens-Illinois and Anheuser Busch. 4. Trucks using SH 257 will not back track to the east on SH 392 to get to the planned Bypass at CR 23. Maybe we should consider moving SH 257 farther to the east. 5. Representatives of both Broe and the ethanol operator have stated that their trucks will not go through Town. 6. Crossroads Blvd. seems like a logical alternative to SH 392, with the exception of one unfinished link. We should test the effectiveness of Crossroads for diverting traffic. 7. Can we model CR 70 and CR 72 as two-lane collectors with appropriate speeds to determine their effectiveness in diverting traffic? 8. The property immediately south of Windsor Estates (known as Green Spire) is planned for residential lots, but has recently been advertised for sale. Could it change uses because of the bypass. 9. The SH 392 EOS did not look at north/south mobility at all. Residents believe that this is essential if the real traffic patterns are to be served. 10. Some of the alternatives may lie within Weld County. What is the role of Weld County in this planning effort? 11. Although the residents have been told that the bypass would not likely be built for many years and, therefore, would not have an impact on them, they don t believe this. As soon as it shows up on a map, they believe that they and their properties are affected. 12. We need to think outside the box and search for creative solutions. 13. The businesses downtown already don t feel that the parking on SH 392 works very well. They have been asking the Town for years to help in developing a downtown parking plan, utilizing lots off the street. 14. The solution will ultimately need to be a mix of improvements. It may include improving a grid street system, removing parking downtown, and other improvements.

37 July 28, 2006 Project File No Page We should look for some short-term solutions as well as long-range solutions. 16. What would be the effect on traffic downtown if the speed limit on SH 392 were reduced? 17. The grading plans for the bypass showed the toe of slope extending into some houses in the neighborhood. The plans elevated the road about 6 feet and included sound walls. Why would the road need to be elevated so much? 18. Timnath has decided that their downtown is not viable and is planning a new downtown elsewhere. Maybe it is time for Windsor to think about an alternative location for a new downtown north of the lake. 19. The residents would like to see some documentation of why some alternatives considered in the SH 392 EOS were deleted early in the process. 20. Eastman Boulevard in the southern part of town was designed to be a southern bypass. Is there any possibility for it to continue farther to the west (through Water Valley)? 21. Why does the Town continue to approve truck generating land uses on the east end of town when those trucks want to get to I-25 on the west end? 22. In developing a transportation plan, one should consider the effects of an aging population trip generation, comfort in traffic (especially trucks), and location of destinations. 23. Windsor Estates is an equestrian community with bridle easements adjacent to the streets. The bypass would eliminate some of the easements. 24. How do you consider the impacts of construction traffic? 25. We should consider the possibility of weight limits on SH 392 in the downtown area to discourage trucks. 26. Some of the residents expressed that they are still unclear about what they are trying to address by building the bypass. Is it trucks? Is it traffic traveling from Greeley to Fort Collins? 27. It was recognized that this is not a public transit study, but it should at least be recognized in the planning consideration.

38

39 SH 392 ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION DOWNTOWN PROPERTY & BUSINESS OWNER WORKSHOP September 21, Meeting Summary FHU Reference No Ten Downtown property and business owners attended a workshop to discuss alternatives for improvements or alternatives routes to SH 392 through Windsor. After a brief summary, by Bob Felsburg, of the Colorado Department of Transportation Environmental Overview Study (EOS) and the objectives of the current Town of Windsor study effort, attendees made the following comments: If on-street parking were removed from Main Street, how would parking be replaced? Could CDOT convert parking to through lanes without a parking replacement plan? (Response CDOT generally cooperates with local jurisdictions and Windsor would probably have a reasonable amount of time to get a plan in place, but Windsor and its property owners and businesses would have responsibility for maintaining parking.) Several businesses are landlocked and rely on Main Street parking. A parking replacement plan would need to be in place before eliminating parking to keep businesses operating. Eliminating Main Street parking would kill downtown. The angled parking is a big part of downtown Windsor s personality. Did the EOS consider safety implications of crossing a wider street with more traffic? Several participants are not in favor of adding lanes and stripping parking from Main Street we should look at other alternative routes to solve traffic problems. Did the EOS look at how much traffic is trucks? Favor using CR 19 for the SH 257 route north of SH 392. Should complete the section-line road network (CR 70, CR 72, CR 74.) rather than widening SH 392. Making Main Street and Walnut Street as a one-way pair may make sense, like US 34 or US 287 in Loveland. Walnut Street could have potential as a commercial street. There are residential subdivisions adjacent to CR 19 north of SH 392, so it may not be that well suited for a state highway designation. If a large portion of SH 392 traffic is Greeley-Fort Collins through traffic, completing the Crossroads / O Street connection could reduce SH 392 demand. A lot of the truck traffic on SH 392 is locally generated, especially from Anheuser Busch. Is SH 392 still needed as a state highway? Is it obsolete with other routes like US 34? We should make better use of exiting right-of-way, like CR 74. Whatever is the best solution, it is important to have a long-range plan in place now to preserve right-of-way and plan around the future routes.

40 SH 392 ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION DOWNTOWN PROPERTY & BUSINESS OWNER WORKSHOP September 21, Meeting Summary Page 2 Downtown Windsor could use some revitalization, and the community should get creative about how it is done. We should put some trust in the professionals. If traffic analysis points to the CR 70 bypass route, it may be the best solution and we should give it a hard look. If the CR 70 bypass route is used, the route should go farther west than shown now, with a straight north-south connection on CR 13. When looking at traffic operations, consider the effects of train crossings. If connections like Crossroads / O Street are important for Windsor, the Town should help to promote it even if it isn t in Windsor.

41 September 13, 2006 Dear Property Owner, The Town of Windsor and its traffic consultant team from Felsburg Holt & Ullevig would like to invite you to a discussion of, possible improvements to, CO Hwy. 392 or alternative routes. The meeting will be held on Thursday, Sept 21 st at the Windsor Community Recreation Center. The intent of the meeting is to hear from business owners and property owners along the corridor so that they can incorporate any comments into the study currently being done. What: Alternate Route Meeting Where: Aspen Room at the Town of Windsor Community Recreation Center When: The meeting will begin at 6:30 P.M. For any questions please contact John Nelson at the information below. Sincerely, John Nelson Management Intern Town of Windsor jnelson@windsorgov.com

42

43