1. P IKES P EAK R EGIONAL N ONMOTORIZED T RANSPORTATION S YSTEM P LAN S TAKEHOLDER M EETING A PRIL 18 TH - 2014

2. 2  Welcome and Introduction  Project Update  Existing Conditions  Identified Routes  Prioritization Criteria  Review Next steps  Close A GENDA

3. 3 W ELCOME

4. 4 P ROJECT U PDATE  Data collection completed (including website outreach, GIS displays and on the ground data collection)  Existing conditions report being finalized  A number of routes identified from the existing conditions data, and amendments from partner staff (PPACG, El Paso County, City of Colorado Springs and City of Woodland Park)  71 DRAFT nonmotorized routes identified during this process

5. 5 E XISTING C ONDITIONS  A comprehensive roundup of nonmotorized conditions in the region  Key data collected included: –Competency Levels –Pedestrian and cyclist accidents over the past 10 years –Rates of cycling, walking and transit to work –Employees place of work and home in the region –School locations –Existing nonmotorized trails –Proposed nonmotorized trails –Existing on road cycle infrastructure –Existing sidewalk coverage –Transit stops –Individual area analysis –Individual trail analysis  The report will be available for download by the end of April  The existing conditions report mirrored many comments provided by the Stakeholder Task Force

6. 6 K EY O BSERVATIONS : O FF -R OAD Large number of high volume and high speed roads create segregation and barriers to nonmotorized travel throughout the region. Region enjoys an extensive multiuse trail network, with the Pikes Peak Greenway acting as the north/south spine of the network. Hwy. 24 & Midland TrailPikes Peak Community College/S. Academy Blvd

7. 7 K EY O BSERVATIONS : O FF -R OAD The surface type and quality of these trails can differ significantly depending on both the trail, and the section of the trail in question. Where the trail network interacts with the road network (e.g., at intersections or where the trail crosses the motorized network) there are different standards of crossing infrastructure in place. Rock Island Trail Manitou Ave.

8. 8 K EY O BSERVATIONS : O N -R OAD In many parts of the region, cyclists rely on nonexclusive shoulders to provide a measure of safety and distance from motorized vehicles. No protected on-road bicycle lanes in the region, which provide separation between bicycles and cars via a physical barrier (such as pylons or planters), or a painted buffer area. On-road cycling system is fragmented and of differing standards. US 24 (E. of Colorado Springs) N. 30 th St. & W. Colorado Ave.

9. 9 K EY O BSERVATIONS : O N -R OAD While some areas of the region have a complete and well maintained sidewalk system, others are either lacking sidewalks or have sidewalks that are of poor quality. Numerous areas throughout the region where informal ‘sidewalks’ have been created by people walking alongside key routes where no sidewalk exists. Colorado Ave. Adjacent to Milton E. Proby Pkwy.

10. 10 K EY O BSERVATIONS : O N -R OAD The design of the road network can also create impediments and difficult conditions for pedestrians, especially where pedestrians wish to cross the road. Milton E. Proby Pkwy. & S. Powers Blvd.

11. 11 D RAFT I DENTIFIED R OUTES Key principles include:  Fill in nonmotorized network gaps  Attract the heaviest use by nonmotorized modes through connecting people to places via the shortest route  Remove major barriers to nonmotorized transportation  Improve cyclist and pedestrian safety  Provide regional links  Input from partner jurisdictions

12. 12 E XAMPLE – R OUTE 10 Big Stratton Reservoir to Downtown Colorado Springs 3.5 miles

13. 13 ConditionsDescription Fill in nonmotorized network gaps The route runs through a number of neighborhoods that currently are not linked by either current or proposed nonmotorized trails or routes. The area also has high levels of difficult to navigate roadways causing barriers to nonmotorized transportation. Attract the heaviest use by cyclist and pedestrians Within ¼ mile of route: Schools: 3 Employment Centers: 5 Parks: 3 Other: 9 Remove major barriers to nonmotorized transportation I US Highway 115 I Lake Avenue I I25 Improve cyclist and pedestrian safety High rate of accidents: 63 historic pedestrian and cyclist accidents per mile (particularly along Nevada Ave. between I25 & Lake Avenue) Provide a regional linkThe route will connect the communities to the Pikes Peak Greenway, and provide a link to Downtown Colorado Springs. The route links the communities of Gold Camp/Broadmoor/Seven Falls/Cheyenne Mountain, Stratmoor Hills, Stratton Meadows and Downtown Colorado Springs.

14. 14 E XAMPLE – R OUTE 13 Route 13: Falcon to Woodmen 12 miles

15. 15 ConditionsDescription Fill in nonmotorized network gaps There is currently no nonmotorized trail or route connecting Falcon to the rest of the nonmotorized network. This is a key regional gap. Attract the heaviest use by cyclist and pedestrians Within ¼ mile of route: Schools: 1 Employment Centers: 5 Parks: 1 Other: 7 Remove major barriers to nonmotorized transportation I Woodmen Road I Marksheffel Road I North Powers Boulevard I Austin Bluffs Parkway I Lexington Drive I North Academy Boulevard Improve cyclist and pedestrian safety Medium rate of accidents: 3.9 historic pedestrian and cyclist accidents per mile Provide a regional linkThe route will connect the communities Falcon to the Pikes Peak Greenway, and a number of other communities in the process. The route links the communities of Falcon, Cimarron Hills (Columbine Estates, Norwood, Vista Grande), Village Seven, Rustic Hills and Palmer Park.

16. 16 I DENTIFIED R OUTE DEVELOPMENT Long List Final List REFINEMENT

17. 17 Y OUR C OMMENTS

18. 18 C OMMENTS A NALYSIS Type No. % Leisure8813% Commute55686% Total*644100 *Total differs slightly from website stats due to some duplicate comments Comment Type No.% Issue41865.01 Suggestion16125.04 Comment619.49 Information30.47 Total643100

19. 19 C OMMENTS S UBCATEGORIES  The comments were then divided into subcategories  Examples –Issue: “Stop sign is not visible coming west on Harrison and autos regularly run the stop sign at full speed.” –Suggestion: “There are a lot of people who live in this area and ride a bike or walk to the Safeway here, it would be nice to have a bike lane here or at Uintah to help cyclists safely cross Circle to Safeway. The sidewalk is no place for a road bike and is pretty busy with pedestrians.” –Comment: “I do not want a conservation easement placed on any part of Bear Creek Park. It will prohibit any new trails from being built in the future and will also prevent athletic events.” –Information: “When eastbound, I avoid the Ridge Road crossing of Colorado, and instead stay on Pikes Peak to 31st. Turn right on 31st and immediately get into the left turn lane for eastbound Colorado. Go 1/2 block and right down the lane between Taco Bell and McDonalds, toward the campground. Get on the bike path there.”

20. 20 L EISURE COMMENTS  Leisure and recreational comments, though not a focus of this study, were grouped and provided to the City of Colorado Springs Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services  Most of the leisure comments fall into the following categories: –Equestrian (trail parking at trailheads, increased open space/trails for recreational horse riding) –Mountain bikers (improved/new mountain bike trails) –Trails (linking recreation trails, surface of current trails)  Example leisure comments: –“ A complete trail over Ute Pass to connect Colorado Springs to Cripple Creek would be fabulous.” –“There is space for directional purpose built MTB trails in this area. Right now it is just a mess of poor trail that is not fun.” –“Small, difficult to park / turn in parking lot. Better parking space for horse trailers is needed at Fox Run Park.” –“2,000 acre park but no horse trails available” –Multi-use trail connectivity is an important piece of tourism for all interests: Equestrian tourism is a growing industry with riders travelling to tourist destinations for trail riding. El Paso County Parks is aware of this. Colorado Springs/Pikes Peak area is a great destination to allow for riders letting their horses acclimate to altitude before going higher.”

21. 21 C OMMUTE /U TILITY C OMMENTS Type No.% Connectivity 14726.4 Infrastructure 9216.5 Surface/Maintenance 8916.0 Intersection/Crossing 7313.1 Other 488.6 Sidewalk 366.5 Signage/Wayfinding 346.1 Safety 274.9 Water Damage 81.4 Lighting/Visibility 20.4 Total 556100%

22. 22 Examples  Connectivity –“Monument, and especially Woodmoor, needs bike trails to connect it to downtown, schools, shopping, YMCA, etc. Currently I feel that I risk my life if I get on my bike, which barely nobody does around here because there are no bike trails. A perfect opportunity to add some is on Jackson Creek Parkway connecting Woodmoor to Home Depot, Walmart, King Sooper shopping plazas.” –“Connect Foothills Trail to Midland Trail off street”  Infrastructure –“Mesa Rd has a bike lane which turns into sharrows as it descents towards 31st. Junction onto the Palmer Mesa Trail needs a ramp to allow easy access from road to trail and to be paved for first section. Other access is from sidewalk ramp to which is at prior road crossing and easy to miss.” –“This neighborhood needs a lot of work to encourage walking and biking. There isn’t a safe, alternative mode route to downtown. Also, this neighborhood isn’t very walkable, busy roads, poorly maintained sidewalks. Maybe consider adding a pedestrian boulevard.” C OMMUTE /U TILITY C OMMENTS

23. 23 C OMMUTE /U TILITY C OMMENTS  Surface/maintenance – “Trail surface of this segment of the Pikes Peak Greenway is very rough - broken asphalt, bumps, and cracks.” – “Sidewalks are cracked and impossible for anybody that uses a wheelchair or any wheeled device. Weeds, cracks.”  Intersection/crossing – “Dangerous and ineffective road crossing, really needs underpass or bridge.” – “This light does not ‘sense’ road cyclist and will never change unless a car rolls up to the intersection also.” – “No crosswalk exists at this intersection to allow pedestrians across HW24 at the stoplight. Having lived at the Woodcrest Apartments I know it is a dangerous place to try to cross either here or at E. Sheridan Ave.”  Other – “This segment of the trail feels un-safe due to loitering and campsites” – “Almost daily I see bikers riding down Fillmore. Now I'm even seeing people in the dark am hours with no lights. Absolutely nuts.”

24. 24 C OMMUTE /U TILITY C OMMENTS  Sidewalk – “Missing / incomplete sidewalks on both sides of this street” – “There is just no way to safely walk up and down Fillmore. Its terrible. No place to be at all.” – “Need to improve pedestrian routes to bus stops to make people feel safe walking to and from bus stops. Nevada is very busy.”  Signage/wayfinding – “There could be a sign here warning drivers of bikers merging onto Templeton Gap from the bike lane.”  Safety – “Need a safe route (for kids and grownups) to Bear Creek.” – “Many cyclists ride along Hwy-83 and there are long stretches without adequate shoulders to safely accommodate them while providing the necessary 3 ft. passing clearance for motorists.”

25. 25 C OMMUTE /U TILITY C OMMENTS  Infrastructure – “Monument, and especially Woodmoor, needs bike trails to connect it to downtown, schools, shopping, YMCA, etc. Currently I feel that I risk my life if I get on my bike, which barely nobody does around here because there are no bike trails. A perfect opportunity to add some is on Jackson Creek Parkway connecting Woodmoor to Home Depot, Walmart, King Sooper shopping plazas. ”  Intersection/crossing & safety – “Dangerous and ineffective road crossing, really needs underpass or bridge.”  Water damage – “High flows on Black Forest Creek often damage a culvert crossing on the New Santa Fe Trail, creating a safety hazard.” – “Trail washed out by flash flood” – “The New Santa Fe Trail north and south of HWY 105 is severely eroded and measures employed by the County to control the erosion are ineffective. Standing water or ice is always present under the bridged road crossing.”

26. 26 C OMMUTE /U TILITY C OMMENTS  Lighting/visibility – “Some reflective paint on the Circle would likely save some wheels and crashes. I know of 4 people that have crashed on this by not seeing it at night or in the snow.” – “This underpass has very poor visibility in both directions and can cause head-on collisions. Trail width is very narrow, hugs the RR bridge wall, has sharp kinks and has a fast slightly down hill approach from both directions. Trail often has lots of loose rock from RR tracks above and silt/mud from overflow of adjacent creek. IMHO, this is one of the most dangerous trail sections and would give it a high priority for redesign. It is a highly used trail section.”

27. 27 TypeNo% Comment9735.8 Agreement7929.2 Suggestion4617.0 Information134.8 Surface/Maintenance124.4 Safety83.0 Connectivity83.0 Water Damage31.1 Intersection/Crossing20.7 Signage/Wayfinding10.4 Lighting10.4 Infrastructure10.4 Sidewalk00.0 Total271100 C OMMUTE /U TILITY S UB C OMMENTS  Suggestion – “bike lane under the road next to creek?” – “there's plenty of room to draw a bike lane and put up signs for bicycle lane.”  Information – “It's my understanding that this portion of the trail remains unpaved due to the historic designation of Rock Ledge Ranch, and a paved bypass in in the works..." – “Improvements are being implemented as part of the I-25 widening project. CDOT has been coordinating with the City and Air Force Academy.”  Comment – “This is the Nature Center and you are not supposed to be riding the trails down here.” – “While I agree, I believe that bridge funds are probably better served elsewhere to get better bicycle connections.”  Agreement – “Totally agree! Major miss here. We want people feeling like the BEST routes go into the areas of downtown, not that you have to work hard to get there” – “I agree with this 100%. It’s like playing frogger.”

28. 28 M AP C OMMENTS AND R OUTES Web Comment Integration  Web comments have been categorized and plotted  75% of all web comments (including recreational) fall within ¼ mile of the identified route network  These comments will be used to develop improvements for the top 10 prioritized routes  The other comments will be captured and shown on the individual area maps and also supplied to the various jurisdictions in the region

29. 29 R OUTE #34 – S AND C REEK T RAIL This route runs from Woodmen Road to Security- Widefield using the Sand Creek Alignment

30. 30 E XAMPLE #1 “Lack of bridge over small inlet to Sand Creek here is the only barrier to an unbroken trail route from north of Woodman, to Barnes road near Sky Sox stadium. (North half is packed gravel suitable to walkers/runners/cyclists except pure road bikes, south half is already paved/bridged)”

31. 31 E XAMPLE #2 “Sand Creek trail already includes finished crossing under Barnes. Complete short connection to Sky Sox Stadium, allowing large population to bike to games without using streets (great for families!).”

32. 32 E XAMPLE #3 “their is no sidewalk when you go up to the bridge. I am legally blind and have to walk that way. Im afraid of falling into the creek”

33. 33 R OUTE #52 - N EW H ORIZONS S CHOOL TO THE B ROADMOOR H OTEL ( VIA L AKE A VE )

34. 34 R OUTE #52 - N EW H ORIZONS S CHOOL TO THE B ROADMOOR H OTEL ( VIA L AKE A VE )

35. 35 E XAMPLE #1 “There is no shoulder on Lake Avenue. This can be quite dangerous to cyclists and pedestrians. We have to ride/walk in the right turn lane, and cars have to go around us.”

36. 36 E XAMPLE #2 “Sidewalks end after the bus stop, is no way to travel north safely.”

37. 37 E XAMPLE #3 “Southbound 115 at exit to Lake Avenue. Definitely a challenge here to go southbound on 115 at busy traffic times. I've found myself taking an unplanned exit down the ramp to Lake Avenue a number of times.”

38. 38 O THER C OMMENTS  No route – Recreational trip “From public meeting: Better trail systems to connect west side of Co Springs to WP & Pikes Peak & beyond American Discover Trails System.”

39. 39 O THER C OMMENTS  No route – Utility trip “A lot of cyclists ride up to the Zoo. Shoulder would enhance safety.”

40. 40 P RIORITIZATION C RITERIA  Next step is to prioritize identified routes. The top 10 routes will be taken forward for more detailed improvement planning.  Prioritization process requires the development of criteria. The previous joint Technical and Stakeholder meeting kicked off this process.  Discussions with the Project Management Team identified key evaluation categories for prioritizing the routes: –Mobility – how well the route improves the movement of people in and around the region. –Network Connectivity – how well the route improves connectivity of the regional network. –Liveability – how well the route promote liveability in the region. –Deliverability – how feasible it is that the route can be constructed.

41. 41 M OBILITY C RITERIA  Improves safety  Grade change on the route  Safe connections for minority, low income & aging communities  Proximity to transit

42. 42 N ETWORK C ONNECTIVITY C RITERIA  Interregional connections  Intraregional connections  Connectivity (to existing infrastructure)  Uses existing infrastructure/provides missing link

43. 43 L IVABILITY C RITERIA  Connections to residential areas  Connection to employment areas  Active routes to major destinations  Addresses existing physical barriers  Provides an alternative to congested roadways

44. 44 D ELIVERABILITY C RITERIA  Synergy with planned motorized routes  Funding source  Rails to Trails  Construction costs

45. 45 F EEDBACK  Consolidate the three density related criteria  Amend or delete the grade change criterion  Delete the interregional connections criterion  Delete the rails to trails criterion

46. 46 P RIORITIZATION CRITERIA DEVELOPMENT Long List Final List REFINEMENT

47. 47 N EXT S TEPS

48. T HANK Y OU FOR Y OUR P ARTICIPATION !