The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20011510.tiff ' FELSBURG f1HOLT & to 'i -a r<, In: el, ULLEVIG engineering paths to transportation solutions June 1, 2001 MEMORANDUM TO: NFRT & AQPC and TAC Members FROM: Elliot SulskestS SUBJECT: Draft 2025 Regional Transportation Plan FHU Reference No. 00-135 Enclosed for your review is a draft 2025 Regional Transportation Plan. This is a complete draft with the exception of the Air Quality Conformity section, which is in process. The plan is scheduled for a brief discussion item at the June 7th meeting and Council action on the plan is scheduled for the July Council meeting. Please review this draft plan and contact staff or me with any questions or comments. Enclosure ES/cg 2001-1510 303.721.1440 fax 303.721.0832 fhu@fhueng.com Ccrnctut (� {e 000 /V Greenwood Corporate Plaza �,_ ,�� '�� 7951 E. Maplewood Ave.Ste.200 Greenwood Village,CO 80111 .>r i-,:. tad '- at,rn.,tto - . t17:G4�' �'""� 0 ljivi ( t `'#4,4,44,1;, ..nn'-`.=i g i 4/40.+444= 1 i ail'd (rq 4144'4g f zi 3$9.[,y484 +,4 {'(#� dt. iii:"'i� ��'"., i^ry ,'k., Tait k1? i1/444,, > ,., i! it 41 B{Ii'lY�1 1,4,, ,.` 7 „ 0. he ,i4 ¢ 0kGE,"�r,, �i°f pt+ i. :.. a ng 4 `i i0fi,+4¢4 + .ht tin0, ,.SY '��y 41,�Poc sM1,Po S„'9V'�"1.4. "y�� s Y i ��yf 'lit U „ a t,rt¢ 'f t YYY, ,. aPt �dr^"h'q4 4{ ii(Ss'"H' f Mim $'�}^;6� I"4iiia`iii ,1 p 4 t Po � i�l ;"1 rfl ^p" 4., St ;%'r,'`; 'ii s""i.` I`#' �r .� , t ,zk $�MAf'F" S f b ,>"'4 '{ ',fi4 `1 w'� e�,N J' i(• .�av °�', o �'y.` 7. aPm 1 �i J� nEporth Front Range at 2025 Regional Transportation Plan '- '" Prepared by: North Front Range Transportation & Air Quality Planning Council P• ` w ISq,iT `I G k �rww 1!s■■ R.�, max' Pam U. ......•...— .4 1. a W lk IIL ►��e�e i �1 ,m ,. � t.— �V F (' @ ro 6 u rf h t�l Po'�.l 1 x ''� .a«�1 4 Yon7404 >•• .' 17 N ram _V ' 1 ■■ ��•Sa�e�l♦ X71 GI'I� 1 e. yawntowns ar 'cue'e- . . . . . With assistance from: Felsburg Holt & Ullevig M°a City Visions Clarion Associates ,. LSC Transportation Consultants - Kimley-Horn and Associates r, n May 2001 I M IMO. 1 MMR,RVMMPo MPo • Con.x'n agen cu e - 6-01J Inc ` idiU r r- NORTH FRONT RANGE 2025 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN jPregal fry: North Front Range Transportation &Air Quality Planning Council r With assistance from: Felsburg Holt & Ullevig 7951 East Maplewood Avenue, Suite 200 Greenwood Village, CO 80111 303/721-1440 and City Visions Clarion Associates ■- LSC Transportation Consultants Kimley-Horn and Associates r• FHU Reference No. 00-135 June, 2001 .. a .. 2025 Regional Transportation Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION 5 A. Project Background 5 B. Other Previous/Ongoing Studies 7 C. Plan Development Process 8 D. Public Involvement 9 E. Vision, Goals And Strategies 10 II. EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM 12 A. Regionally Significant Corridors 12 B. Roadway System 12 C. Transit System 25 D. Bicycle And Pedestrian System 37 E. Freight Corridors 37 F. Rail System 41 G. Travel Demand Management Program- 41 H. Aviation Facilities 42 III DEMOGRAPHIC/ENVIRONMENTAL PROFILE 43 A. Socio-Economic Data 43 B. Environmental Profile 45 IV. TRAVEL DEMAND ANALYSIS 47 A. Overview 47 B. Travel Demand Growth 47 C. Year 2025 Forecasts 49 V. VISION PLAN 54 A. Project Prioritization Process 54 B. Vision Plan 56 VI. 2025 FISCALLY CONSTRAINED PLAN 74 A. Resource Allocation 74 B. Funding Estimates 74 C. Committed Resources 76 D. Fiscally Constrained Plan 78 E. Other CDOT Programs 83 VII. SHORT-RANGE FISCALLY CONSTRAINED PLAN 85 A. Short-Range Transit Element 85 B. Aviation Element 93 VIII. AIR QUALITY CONFORMITY FINDING 95 IX. PLANNING PROCESS 96 A. Transportation Improvement Program Development- 96 B. Future Regional Transportation Planning Considerations 96 C. Plan Amendment Process 97 APPENDIX A GLOSSARY OF TERMS APPENDIX B SUMMARY OF PUBLIC OPEN HOUSES FELSBURG 1^ ' HOLT & ULLEVIG PPP ' r7VN 2025 Regional Transportation Plan LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure I-1 North Front Range Planning Area 6 Figure 1-2 Plan Development Process 8 Figure II-1 Regionally Significant Corridors in the North Front Range 13 Figure 11-2 1999 Average Daily Traffic Volumes in the Fort Collins Area 17 Figure 11-3 1999 Average Daily Traffic Volumes in the Greeley and Evans Area- 18 Figure 11-4 1999 Average Daily Traffic Volumes in the Loveland Area 19 Figure 11-5 1999 Average Daily Traffic Volumes Outside of the City Areas 20 Figure 11-6 Fort Collins (Transfort) Bus Routes 26 Figure 11-7 Greeley Bus Routes 30 Figure 11-8 Loveland Bus Routes 33 Figure 11-9 Existing Bicycle Facilities in the Fort Collins Area 38 Figure 11-10 Existing Bicycle Facilities in the Greeley Area 39 Figure II-11 Existing Bicycle Facilities in the Loveland Area 40 Figure IV-1 Roadway System LOS 1998/2025 48 Figure IV-2 Roadway System LOS 2025 Build 49 Figure IV-3 Year 2025 Daily Traffic Forecasts in the Fort Collins Area 50 Figure IV-4 Year 2025 Daily Traffic Forecasts in the Greeley Area 51 Figure IV-5 Year 2025 Daily Traffic Forecasts in the Loveland Area 52 Figure IV-6 Year 2025 Daily Traffic Forecasts in the City Areas 53 Figure VI-1 Fiscally Constrained Plan in Fort Collins Area 79 Figure VI-2 Fiscally Constrained Plan in the Greeley Area- 80 Figure VI-3 Fiscally Constrained Plan in Loveland Area 81 Figure VI-4 Fiscally Constrained Plan in North Front Range Region 82 Figure VI-5 2025 Fiscally Constrained Plan Summary 78 Figure VII-1 Fort Collins Transfort Scenario 1: Minimal Redesign- 86 Figure VII-2 Fort Collins Transfort Scenario 2: Minimal Redesign with Mason 87 r r P' FELSBURG ,. CHOLT & ULLEVIG 2025 Regional Transportation Plan LIST OF TABLES r Table II-1 Highway Miles by Functional Classification 15 Table 11-2 Major Roadway Miles by Functional Classification 16 Table 11-3 Roadway Surface Conditions of State Highways 21 Table 11-4 Bridges with Deficiencies in the NFR 23 Table 11-5 Accident Rates on State Highways 24 Table III-1 1998 Household and Employment Data 43 Table III-2 Projected Growth of Households 44 Table III-3 Projected Growth of Employment 45 .- Table IV-1 Growth in Vehicle Miles of Travel 48 Table V-1 Bicycle/Pedestrian Projects 57 Table V-2 Highway/HOV Projects 59 Table V-3 Rail Crossing Projects 64 Table V-4 Passenger Rail Projects 65 Table V-5 Transit Projects 66 Table V-6 Travel Demand Management Projects 70 Table V-7 Transportation System Management Projects- 71 Table VI-1 Estimates Of Available Funding- 75 Table VII-1 Short Range Transit Element -Transfort- Fort Collins 89 Table VII-2 Short-Range Transit Element-The Bus - Greeley 89 Table VII-3 Short-Range Transit Element- COLT- City of Loveland 90 Table VII-4 Short-Range Transit Element- Regional Transit Services 90 Table VII-5 Short Range Transit Element - Rural Larimer County 92 Table VII-6 Short-Range Transit Element- Rural Weld County- 92 .. Table VII-7 Fort Collins Municipal Airport Capital Improvement Program 93 Table VII-8 Greeley-Weld County Airport Capital Improvement Program 94 r r r r pm FELSBURG i HOLT & ULLEVIG — 2025 Regional Transportation Plan t INTRODUCTION 2025 Regional Transportation Plan I. INTRODUCTION A. Project Background In 1991, Congress enacted the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), directing each state to prepare a multi-modal transportation plan. For this effort, the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) has divided the state into fifteen transportation planning regions (TPRs), each of which is required to prepare a Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). These RTPs are then used as the basis for the formulation of Colorado's 20-Year Transportation Plans. The North Front Range, with a planning area as shown on Figure I-1, is one of the fifteen TPRs. It is surrounded on three sides by the Upper Front Range TPR and is bordered on the south by the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG) planning area. As shown, the region includes the more populous portions of Larimer and Weld Counties. There are ten incorporated communities within the NFR TPR, including the cities of Fort Collins, Greeley, and Loveland and the Towns of Berthoud, Evans, Garden City, Johnstown, LaSalle, Timnath and Windsor. Each of the individual communities is growing independently, but the need to grow cooperatively is also recognized. Because of the rapid growth in the region, transportation planning issues continue to be fundamental, both locally and regionally. Easy travel between the communities of the region and improved travel options to the Denver metro area are the focuses of transportation planning in the NFR. The North Front Range Transportation and Air Quality Planning Council (NFRT & AQPC), the designated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), is responsible for transportation planning in the region. The NFRT & AQPC completed and adopted the North Front Range 2015 Regional Transportation Plan in 1994, then completed and adopted the 2020 Regional Transportation Plan in 1998. The NFRT & AQPC has undertaken this current effort to update and refine the 2020 RTP, expanding the time horizon to the year 2025. This planning process was conducted under the direction of the Council, which is comprised of a representative from each of the two counties, each of the ten communities in the region, the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), and the Colorado Air Quality Control Commission. A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) made up of representatives from the two counties and six of the communities within the region, CDOT, and the Colorado Air Pollution Control Division assists the Council. The TAC performed the technical tasks necessary to complete the plan, reviewed all of the work performed by the consulting team, and made recommendations to the Council. r . r pi FELSBURG r+ C4 HOLT & ULLEVIG Page5 -1 1 ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 . 1 1 ' - 1 LCR64 .2- (7, I wcn106 {� dunr^�" v v 7 wca9e rvu 1°. R R - ii 287 r 3 3 t{�� y� yy Uy 0 3 3 \ 3 ; S 3 WCR 96 U �_ Q U WCRDI FS 111111■ 11 L 1 25 LCR56 cci 3 3 3 ;¢ 85 R5 WCR 92 _ 11 .�I♦� ,.,xlir I 90 � ■11■II1�,P rce L:WCR88 a u:, LCR52 cr UIIIIII■111, ■_WCRB6 u �� .6 �, 3 WCRea 1 1,,.r.>�■�U UA t 11 C'44 rr RBO 114,1' s ,1', o 5 © _ R)B u' 1�II :h 1 n nA IS C. ■ vmvI ' R)6' ..1 genii ,,y, 'N LL CR3B - a 1Ee ion R 7 4 68 1 i L R36 ■ na , 9:9 yen PP R)2 ~` la AK- I ay! I�11 so 11 . I. WC 70 Illl�llf '1� ,'y m [ �—t��•_■ 082 2' LCR30E L\l�1 �1 i i� Tn —L� HC'66 w Adger R. ¢ T9 i■�� t i u _ .;O. (,,e0 ` lIA IL CO 34 I � . eA L1.4— � \ \ ■�� 34 +r! E � wc- J -U �• p19 LCa1B■�, ��'■LCR16 t- ST 090■ WCR �■ J1 N ry Q CaI< r 60 _.1111 _ �I T let 11 .--- 'LATH ' Cr Cr IX V N '� m�LCR 12 Johrob 1 ` Jri I� , • 3 ; 3 ; L$1 dc-e /(J (Ii LCR6 %nly 1 ii LCROCc es, ,' 1111�60Glic � i■ WCRRoo ',AMMER COUNTY I L��Iir. • r ROULDBRcOUNTY287 ; ,ti6 ; ; Figure 1-1 FELSBURG E;7=7,0ro_H o LT & North Front Range Planning Area ULLEvtc Manning We+NI 00-135 6/1/01 r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan B. Other Previous/Ongoing Studies .- Many elements of the 2020 Regional Transportation Plan have served as the basis for this 2025 plan. In addition, subsequent to the adoption of the 2020 Regional Transportation Plan, there have been a number of other transportation planning efforts in the region which have an influence on the development of the new RTP. In addition to the transportation plans that have been and are being developed by individual counties, cities and towns within the NFR, following are recent and ongoing transportation plans that are regional or inter-jurisdictional in nature: The North Front Range Transportation Alternatives Feasibility Study (TAFS) is an inter-regional study aimed at developing improvements for transportation between major North Front Range communities and the Denver metropolitan area. Phase I of the TAFS, completed in 1999, examined the purpose and need for transportation improvements and developed and evaluated conceptual alternatives. Phase II, completed in 2000, involved detailed evaluation of the short- list of improvement alternatives developed in Phase I, and culminated in a preferred plan. The preferred plan included development of a passenger rail system extending from Denver, along the 1-25 corridor, connecting to both Fort Collins and Greeley; as well as a set of highway and bus service improvements in the 1-25, US 287 and US 85 corridors. The NFRT &AQPC and the Upper Front Range Regional Planning Commission recently completed the Regional Transportation Services and Funding Feasibility Study. This study was conducted in order to address the funding gap that is projected to exist between available funding and the identified regional transportation needs for the two regions, including TAFS recommendations. The study recommended that the two regions pursue the establishment of a North Front Range Transportation Authority. PO The 1-25 Corridor Plan is a cooperative effort among eight jurisdictions (two counties and six municipalities) to prepare a plan for the 30 mile long Northern Colorado segment of the interstate corridor. Local officials hope that the 1-25 Plan will result in quality development, a framework for a multi-modal transportation network, and recognition of natural areas and open lands along the corridor. r` The Crossroads Subarea Transportation Study is an ongoing cooperative planning study involving the City of Loveland, Town of Windsor, CDOT, Larimer County, NFRT & AQPC, and the private sector. The study is aimed at developing a transportation improvement plan to support the rapidly developing six square-mile study area surrounding the I-25/Crossroads Boulevard (Larimer County Road 26) interchange. Recommendations emerging from the study include improvements to 1-25 interchanges, along with development of an efficient supporting arterial roadway network. A recently commissioned effort is being kicked off in May 2001 involving the US 34 corridor. More specifically, the effort involves the development of an access control plan and a corridor optimization plan for approximately 26 miles of US 34 from 1-25 east to the Town of Kersey. The Access Control Plan element involves developing a plan identifying all future driveways, cross- - streets, signal locations, and grade-separated interchanges/overpasses. The effort will be also entail the development of a Corridor Optimization Plan based on guidelines recently adopted by CDOT. The optimization plan will identify the most appropriate means of maximizing the US 34 FELSBURG T flHOLT ULLEVIG Page 7 r T's 2025 Regional Transportation Plan corridor's ability to serve the movement of people and goods. It will consider the potential for interchanges, alternate modes of travel, HOV lanes, Travel Demand Management (TDM) measures, Transportation System Management (TSM) measures, Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), roadway widening, parallel roadway systems, and surrounding land uses. Both efforts will be conducted simultaneously, and they are anticipated to be completed by the end of 2002. C. Plan Development Process This planning effort included a reconsideration of the goals of the 2020 RTP; an updated inventory of the existing transportation system; an extension of the growth projections for the region to a 2025 horizon year; a re-identification of the needed transportation improvements, reflecting recent planning efforts throughout the region; refinement of the methodology to prioritize the needed improvement projects; an update of the projected funding available to implement improvements; and development of the regional transportation plan that can be .- implemented within projected funding constraints. The NFR 2025 RTP includes two plans, the Vision Plan and the Financially Constrained Plan. The Vision Plan is a complete list of transportation needs within the region as projected over the next 24 years. The Financially Constrained Plan includes the high priority projects from the Vision Plan that are likely to be funded within the projected financial resources available to the r region. The basic structure of the process used in the development of the fiscally constrained Regional Transportation Plan is illustrated by Figure 1-2. REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN HIGHWAY/ TRANSIT RAIL BIKE/PEP TDM TSM HOV v. RESOURCE ALLOCATION by COUNCIL TRANSIT RAIL BIKE/PED TWA TSM HIGHWAY/NOV AVAILABLE FUNDS S S S S S S RECOf.(ENDED A_ A_ A_ PROJECT z— zn a— a— z— PRIORITIZATION '� '� a�� z� 3 by TAC TRANSIT RAIL BIKE/PED TRAVEL TRANSP. HIGHWAY/ DEMAND SYSTEMS HOV MGMNT. MGAINT. Figure 1-2 Plan Development Process pm FELSBURG r (4 HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 8 r- 2025 Regional Transportation Plan As shown, the process, in concept, involves two primary elements: IPM • Project Prioritization: Ranking of projects within each of six project categories • Resource Allocation: Allocation of available funding to the different project categories r The project prioritization process is largely a technical effort and, therefore, was conducted primarily through the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). On the other hand, the allocation of the funding resources available to the region is a policy issue and, thus, was conducted by the Council. The projects included in the Financially Constrained Plan should be used by the NFRT & AQPC in developing the six-year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) for the region. This, in turn, is the basis for requests to be included in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), developed by the Colorado Department of Transportation. D. Public Involvement The public plays an important role in any planning process, as the citizens will be impacted by the improvements or changes made in the region. The interests represented by both the public and the governmental agencies within the region are often quite diverse, and, therefore, everyone must be given an opportunity to participate in the planning process. For this study, public involvement was solicited at several key points: • The goals of the plan and a preliminary list of proposed Vision Plan projects were r� reviewed and commented on by the public in September 2000. Two public workshops were conducted, one at the Foothills Fashion Mall in Fort Collins and one at the Greeley Mall. r , • In January 2001, the public was advised of the preliminary prioritization of the projects and the funding limitations. Public comments were solicited at open houses held at the Foothills Fashion Mall, the Greeley Mall and at the Loveland Public Library. • In May, 2001 , prior to approval of the plan, a third set of public workshops at the same three locations was held to solicit comments on the draft plan. The mailing list of participants in the 2020 RTP planning process was updated to include current government officials and other appropriate community members, and everybody on this list received invitations to all of the public open houses. Newspapers and other media sources were also used to advertise the open houses. Summary information on the open houses is included in Appendix B. r" d S FELSBURG Pm. (4 HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 9 r r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan E. Vision, Goals And Strategies The Council has adopted the following Vision Statement to set the path for the transportation system in the North Front Range: Vision Statement re. Recognizing the unique character of the region, we will provide an environmentally, socially and economically sensitive multi-modal transportation system that protects and enhances the region's quality of life. r— Guiding Principles The following Guiding Principles and ten Goals were then established by the Council to guide the transportation planning process for the region: The Council's Guiding Principles will be to: • Assure that all residents have adequate access to the process of transportation and air quality planning and project selection. • Foster a transportation system that will effectively address the current and future needs of the region within fiscal constraints. • Encourage local governments to work together as a council to develop a balanced approach to providing: .- System capacity • Alternative transportation choices • Interconnectivity with other regions .. • Integration of transportation, land use and air quality planning Goals 1. To provide a safe, balanced, multi-modal transportation system that can move people, goods and information quickly and efficiently. 2. To foster regional coordination and transportation system continuity. 3. To connect modal systems. 4. To minimize congestion on the transportation system. 5. To meet the needs of the transportation disadvantaged. 6. To ensure adequate maintenance of the transportation system. ppFELSBURO (4HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 10 r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan r 7. To minimize negative environmental impacts and improve air quality. 8. To support land use consistent with comprehensive plans. 9. To provide a positive economic impact. Pm" 10. To identify funding needs and to explore and support all potential approaches to fulfill those needs. Two Key Strategies have been established as means to reach the established Goals: • The Council strongly believes that a principal strategy for achieving these goals should be to affect a reduction in the share of travel by single occupant vehicles (SOV's) by providing regional support for alternative travel modes including walking, bicycling, buses, passenger rail, carpooling, vanpooling, and telecommuting. Efforts to affect this shift from SOV's to alternative modes should focus on peak period travel; travel along strategic corridors; and travel to and from major activity centers, particularly the region's two major universities and its major employment centers. • A network of Regionally Significant Corridors should be established based upon travel demand and connections between major North Front Range and surrounding communities and activity centers. Regional planning and transportation investments should focus on maintaining efficient, multi-modal mobility along these strategic corridors. r mot r r vow pFELSBURU (4 HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 11 2025 Regional Transportation Plan II. EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM 2025 Regional Transportation Plan II. EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM Inventorying the existing transportation systems within the region is an integral step of the planning process as it is used to identify areas in need of improvement over the prospective twenty-year planning period. A variety of documents and plans were researched to develop an ., accurate, up-to-date database of existing transportation facilities and programs. CDOT currently maintains a Geographic Information System (GIS) Transportation Planning Data Set, which describes much of the existing transportation system. This has served as the basis for much of the information presented in this section. A. Regionally Significant Corridors As one of its key strategies to reach the region's transportation goals, the Council has developed a network of Regionally Significant Corridors. Regional significance is defined by a corridor's providing an important link between major communities and destinations within or outside of the NFR. Other criteria that have been used to help distinguish corridors of regional significance include high levels of current and projected travel demand, the economic importance to the region, and the ability to relieve other primary regional routes. Through the project prioritization process, this RTP provides an emphasis on planning for and making multi- modal investments in these Regionally Significant Corridors. The NFRT & AQPC has adopted the routes shown on Figure II-1 as Regionally Significant r Corridors. Included in this network are nearly all segments of the 12 State or U.S. highways in the region, along with a number of county or city arterial roads that were judged to meet the criteria of regional significance. In addition, parts of two planned roadway corridors, Larimer County Road 5 and the planned extension of Two Rivers Parkway, have been designated as Planned Regional Corridors. �^ B. Roadway System The roadway system is currently the principal component of the transportation system within the North Front Range TPR. Not only does it provide a means for vehicular traffic, including cars and trucks, but it also provides infrastructure for bicyclists and transit service. 1. Functional Classification I The roadway network is comprised of a hierarchy of roadways defined by their functional classification and how they serve the mobility and access needs of the users. As mobility increases on a roadway, access decreases, and conversely, as access increases, mobility decreases. The roadway functional types are more thoroughly described, in order of their ability to provide mobility, as follows: r r r IP FELSBURG i HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 12 7 - 1 1 1 1 I I ) I ) I ' 1 ) 1 I 1 : -1 L R& h WCR100 n 987 LCR62 3 3 g WCR 98 Nu (9R 55^�� 1 59; Q �' SLCR60 3 I 3 3 3 3 WCR96 � C.1 1� LLRSB 2 Lr WCR94 U C — 428 LCR56 Sci 3 3 ; WCR 82 CR j(- 5 ■ . WCR90 \"" me LEGEND 4, wcRee g L ■� 3 WCRB6 = Regionally Significant Corridors ICfl 50 - se wcRer = Planned Regional Corridor I N+� ��■ ■■■ _ � 16 = Extensions of Regionally Significant Corridors Outside NFR • C-W WC R80 ��_11111YJJ• Lam O �n� , WCRvB F: ig c (.7,,„,„AWCR 76' I a LCR4 w, IIIw ti Ee ton WCR?4 I � '77 68 I �fl36 ■ no eq ` • fVCfl Y2•287 • �� rr. r _ e 3 �■� in ��° 1 Greeley st 1 O▪ 086 + j ■ --� a: b ��- WC- I �O e cam\ 34 LCR1B 5.1 ^ • „� LCfl16 '1 WCR/52 NO R LCR I< ■ •1 S �. k C m - w N� 69 �. E';� , a a ¢ ¢ a a N -�,a i.ncR rz �■ Jw to .1. I i- ,./. � 1■ ` ' U 3 ' 3 3 i `r1IIR�1 � .. g t •• U L Rt ` ' Irl ` M I� •��• 1/�/) w� 3 3 yV 4■ WCRM w, • I- it▪ , LC BLCR6 ■R. ^d r, j■s �..,. 1■� 'a" Uy'�yy. 3�■ WCR 2 y I ES LCR4 ■ J 125 U �w 3 �'I•�� WC 3 cc y■■■ WCR40 !AMMER COUNTY• - • BOULDER COUNTY Th uarg!. •• •• ' ri u 3 i i 3 3 ir Figure II-1 pi FELSBURO Regionally Significant H O L T & pe neon Air rn,mv ULLEVIG waayoxi.m Corridors in the North Front Range 00-135 6/1/01 2025 Regional Transportation Plan Freeway: Freeways, including Interstate highways, primarily serve long distance travel between major communities. Freeways provide the greatest mobility, with strictly controlled access allowed only at interchanges. Arterial: Principal and minor arterials carry longer-distance major traffic flows between important ^" activity centers. The primary difference between freeways and principal arterials is access; freeways have fully controlled accesses with no at-grade intersections, while principal arterials may include at-grade intersections. r Minor arterials augment the principal arterial system. These roadways place a higher emphasis on access, instead of mobility, distributing travel to smaller destinations with moderate trip lengths. The primary difference between urban and rural arterials is in the distance traveled. In urban settings, arterials typically connect activity centers within a community and in rural settings arterials usually connect communities. Collector: Collector roads link local streets with the arterial street system. Both mobility and access take similar precedence on collector roadways. The urban collector system provides both land access service and traffic circulation within residential neighborhoods and commercial and industrial areas. These collector roadways provide direct access to activity centers. Rural collector roadways provide travel between communities as well as providing greater access to local roadways and/or driveways. Local Roadway: The primary function of local roads is to provide access to adjacent land uses, in both urban and rural areas. The CDOT transportation data set divides the roadways within the North Front Range into three primary categories: highways, major roads and local roads. Highways are defined as Interstates, U.S. Highways and State Highways. Table II-1 summarizes the classification and the associated miles of roads within the North Front Range that fall within the highway category. r r` r FELSBURG HOLT & ■ ULLEVIG Page 14 r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan Table II-1 Highway Miles by Functional Classification r Miles of Highway Functional Class Larimer County' Weld County' NFR Total Freeway 4 23 27 Non-Interstate Interstate — Rural 11 6 17 Interstate — Urban 10 0 10 Other Principal Arterial 37 16 53 — Rural Other Principal Arterial 17 4 21 _ — Urban Minor Arterial — Rural 78 15 23 Minor Arterial — Urban 3 13 16 r Collector— Urban 1 4 5 Major Collector— Rural 9 15 24 TOTAL 100 96 196 Source: CDOT GIS Data Set. 1 Only the portions of Larimer and Weld County within the NFR TPR r r r r r r PPFELSBURG .� LT & ■ ULLEVIG Page 15 r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan The major roadways, which are not Interstate, U.S. or State Highways, are also divided into functional classification. These are mostly county roads and other similar roadways in the network. Table 11-2 summarizes the miles of roadway for each class of major roadway. It should be noted that the table below does not include the local roads. Table II-2 Major Roadway Miles by Functional Classification Total _ Functional Class Miles,of Roadway Principal Arterial 24 Minor Arterial 165 r Collector 147 Major Collector— Rural 95 r Minor Collector— Rural 113 TOTAL 544 r Source: CDOT GIS Data Set. 2. Existing Daily Traffic Volumes Figures 11-2, II-3, 11-4 and 11-5 present the existing daily traffic volumes on major roadways in Fort Collins, Greeley, Loveland, and non-urban areas, respectively. These counts were obtained from the cities and/or CDOT. r r r r r . FELSBURG (4HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 16 l Douglas R6. CR 54 S ) m \V Pq CR SOG �] C. l ` \ • L..� .• ----co CR 52 tis J6 a a c...., moor j .. tr r• 44%a'••rifER a..n.n Nn.w. cR50 m 1..;] PM ry r IrA .-4" :', j ¢ �.�..1 n C ¢ Hasa - a. J. (J ¢ N u .�Ecri&er ••J j j r••_j j Vine Dr. ' MS Vine Dr ' • z "...ER 48 r .J1 VOLUMES;3% ® �:J7.r 6b rc �j��T q : \.: :>; .._.L..J aHRH A d d w .. )6. 1 \.\., 1.'_I . Muroem .1v �►��y isJa ,, 14 u ..�.. ._,!l Elizabeth Sr X. 4'^� .14•4 . 4, •• ••�. .. Holism\ rill I CR44 w Proepecl RC. L '.se .261 yb I24.91.... RES.'. I 1 7 .. I35.6]--• U4 . 33 J33 t.'' : a 19A. " .J CR44 ._ i • _ 14 v];,. \ •d F• 1 S \ L.J • CR42 162 E Ora =R Rd 151 �•,1 4 P.. CR eO Nprderaprn Rd. 74.4 169 ` �'1 CRw ug Y 1 ✓•CR 38E Ills M3 As 32.3 3 ..\• U (/ 1 138 Il.] aHallmpnyRO�AM�r .. •L., :CR8 68•Ii W`i ] I r .r• f j • f L..�. r.. CR 56 k _..�. C � p i it" el i ici 1 € \ CR 92i i RC ae ^ 32 �:' 1 \ a. R¢ ¢n U cr U �T U N^ U CR90 _ i 135 . n Lincoln Ave. LaPorte Ave. \ LEGEND 9.9 e5 n = 1999 Average DailyTraffic Volumes Ma Mountain Ave 1 = 1995 Average Daly Traffic Volumes e 15.4N :4.. 1 ₹ +,y NOTE:Volumes in Thousands co F.3—I1 1a, N Mu10emsr. $ 6 ^ 2I laurel Sr. 3 6 t_I Figure 11-2 10.11 FELSBURG ,,�y--,� 1999 Average Daily Traffic Forcasts U o EVIL �`T^ber' in the Fort Collins Area 00-155 6/01/01 -1 • 1 • 1 1 - 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 _ 1 SA a• ax 41 1.9 J9 1n � ® ems!. 0 R Rh S. 4 & r.. .I l.. y ¢ 1.9 1 gc • rOm 51. SW.. It Ff el 1 /._- Ib F 93 " IS e. a' NORM e NCXM r.9m S. R 1 i4S Ilan s °IY 6 WM9r •IJ I.f a s .._.. oa• • I $ Y I ,mn S. ' II .r il _•lJ'�..' r.._ 53 91 i4� a ' "-I-- I a'n 1 1°J F ' paAe' �� ,ice ��.i f�. I \ K� _ '1 114 lar 6.`'CR'\ . -. .�..Y^ _ I NCH@ , Ib Fa C 03: 11 .._./ _.._e_.., 85 1 22nd St . I" • 10.9 • �• 2• I � a 33 _n.n_� Iai ._.._.. .._..' I' 16 .��. 9e i.i 10.9 r IAI _...'nn....1._n._..._.n.¢—___.___ ' ,na a) 1 11 116 151 161 ! 31A mast �• ;,ffia MOE 014 F>"f mesa ' f Dulness lag 213 ��li1®11 •VOLUMES Pte. �.-•' t.._.I^•4 . ....... I� ® IfJfmarS,�il t2''.1 , ma, _Q ! �8 e 1 i I ? ... , 153 I ls4 '. 9A ' llf _a6A :a FM._ t.I _ ®�ele _ 31A 1 a I :.fir MCH 9.1 nn p. 1LIL •alder. ., .\i Sb 9.1 O 163 I 31.1 JIJ iii TEA m 31 34 zem m. ■ _ .�` IL1 g34 lA a9.. 313 -- 31U ..i( a � EM: Sans y1�J�1 1.. •►.. s9ea. A _.._.._.._..g.._.., , ocir , N �Aa LZ ,Ma 1.1 .---- f, IS L...1 EVANS LEGEND I ------ ci = Existing Average Daily Traffic Volumes NOTE:Volumes in Thousands Figure 11-3 tillFELSBURG ","...\ 1999 Average Daily Traffic Forecasts uuaevio tiroi.a In the Greeley Area MI>5/30/011 1 . 1 1 1 1 ` 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -..__.__....n.��.__. �.�� 257 m MA o a 321 1 `c m caso • ._• '\ •�' V4 s6a 6. I •. 9 \ .•J •\•..j ti a.A 570300R ` EaTv(Po. `a / I IS d 29N6. C_.l'IL Henxmrloe s LAIIIi E—" $' err J.`,,. i . cam .._� I I . 1 r.._.._. _.. ... •f 11 ) ) ( _.._. Z ( ) 1611 E1. 'al 9M SY 120 `y r � �•• GHNE• .._.._.._.. .. 273 284 DA p Af EeA 23.7 EiSenlpxN I S8M 6mf 9 PT II —+� ((�.�� (�} ,,','4,., 1 ry E T . ; I �..�� IIA .P V .v' ' V�1 Y'4,.f l• 7 c I ! I IA VA u ..7rb/ wa 4. 611 Sr. '. ✓^ _ .11 I9A ••'EIA 1tA e. ..,_... "�1 T r I.l.._•}•12.11 _..5. J• CI ow VI rl SEE INSET nh St 7 THIS MGE Po6 I 1 er//' •\••••••• l 0.r piss to 10.e f1 �• 1st 51. 9A .,,• i{'1 I:A \" •�{ 1=J , .1 4 yTp i ! Eta 1 \\1 8 i :"+. � e J rnris� .1 `�.. J cw fe Q" !sA — aO.• 9A i ue MO I lu u fa a 181251 I it N ca feEus N Tv all ._-...�- ._. '..'�'��- care cafe • I cafe c „ 2E7 LEGEND ° ° / F---1 = 1999 Average Daily Traffic Volumes NOTE:Volumes in Thousands Figure 11-4 FELSRURG 7"..%N. 1999 Average Daily Traffic Forecasts ULLEV Ea floyf�Rao Iee�lly u O L Ea In the Loveland Area P36133 5/01/01 1 " _ ] ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ' 1 "J '-1 k t.7 0 I ,,,, ., ry v,vRIW F91F —MI" ■�■ B wcnae NU';.arti a G W 11 111 imil iwc-R: IStilliallirnit„ 111 Illy v � Il� ►1111tci■■..■■.■'�� ■s1I!n'rn!IIIa\F. - 1 • .....�wr�w�r, me - , #. ,:r834! I t \. 1\ 1rT■■■■art=■ ! 7 � � ��ile��i■l 1.._..n , o f ' !r u / 1afl:n■1♦a ro e i [m iaimmun n 1 ' 1,caV!iir"s��1 �1�1 '1 v ' � ® L�. � . . , LEGEND ' ¢� ■• { �ur..�-{-[4 s �illso J � � ©l x.[x = 7999 Average Daily Traffic Volumes • �� ::r---c-4i: lc Ft �6.. . r-. .the' ,n ':-�`=IL I ~ NOTE:Volumes in Thousands � ware' " '4J1�f, ®s��¢nle��\4�1ZM ,■ wcnm �M��!zu Imo- � iiir ti IIIIMclitan,a Nip 'L9-...........--li` ;7 .,, � evcRM n Fa■illprii-crillM■ lerre MC towAMI M a�a LAa1M6N CUIMTI�" 1 'al J.. ..rr ;i P1!7ARE� NCflee &MUM COUNTY a. Figure II-5 illFEL59URD ��"�\ Year Average Daily Traffic Forecasts HOLT h r�"Aso.mn u«svic ,r.00,eoere Outside of the City Areas eu aepim l a 2025 Regional Transportation Plan n. 3. Roadway Surface Condition CDOT monitors roadway conditions on the state highway system throughout the state on a yearly basis. Roadways are given a rank based on the roughness and rutting of the roadway as well as the amount of cracking and patching. The matrix shown to the right is then used to categorize each segment of roadway as having "good", "fair", or"poor" surface conditions. Table 11-3 presents the percentage of roadways having good, fair and poor surface classifications in Larimer and Weld counties in the North Front Range TPR. Larimer County has a higher percentage of good and fair roads as compared to Weld County. This table also shows a comparison between the conditions of the roads in the North Front Range and the State of Colorado. Overall, the North Front Range TPR has a larger percentage of roadways, approximately 45 percent, with poor classification as compared to the statewide average of 35 percent. However, the North Front Range TPR has a larger percent of roadways with fair surface condition than the statewide average. Table II-3 Roadway Surface Conditions of State Highways „^kk}�,pd M1{E ou nR` 4�h7i 2 i ty yp }di G d gli J 5"'i (�i t� .$ry °r•` i 1 ARAT 4( '- Larimer 16.6% 46.0% 37.4% Weld 14.2% 33.2% 52.6% North Front Range Total 15.4% 39.8% 44.8% Statewide Total 39.1% 25.8% 35.1% Source: CDOT's Transportation Planning Data Set r i r r r FELSBURG ll 4HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 21 7 2025 Regional Transportation Plan 4. Special Roadway Corridors ,. The following section describes roadway corridors which have special designation, serve a special purpose, or can be characterized by the nature of their use. In the North Front Range TPR, such corridors include National Highway System corridors and Scenic and Historic corridors. National Highway System ^ The National Highway System (NHS) includes the interstate highway system and a significant amount of the urban and rural principal arterial system. As mentioned earlier, there are approximately 196 miles of highways within the North Front Range TPR. Approximately 52 percent, 100 miles, are on the National Highway System and the remaining 48 percent, 96 miles, are not designated as part of this system. Scenic and Historic Roadways Colorado has identified over 2000 miles of roadway as Scenic Byways within the state. The Cache la Poudre - North Park (SH 14 and US 287) is the only Scenic Byway in the North Front Range TPR. Only a few miles of this byway are within the northern part of the North Front Range TPR. ^ 5. Bridge Condition Bridges comprise an important element of the roadway network, as inadequate bridges can cause various capacity and safety problems. CDOT regularly inspects and evaluates all bridges on the state highway system and gives them a sufficiency rating so that structurally deficient and functionally obsolete bridges are identified. The definitions used by FHWA for these categories are as follows: • Structurally Deficient. Those bridges which are in advanced stages of deterioration, or are in marginal condition, but still function at a minimum level. Also included in this category are bridges which do not have desired load carrying capacities. • Functionally Obsolete. Those bridges which have acceptable load carrying capacity, but impose unacceptable physical restrictions (narrow width, restricted vertical clearance, limited sight distances, speed reducing curves, or insufficient waterway adequacy). ^ There is a total of 147 bridges on the state highway system in the North Front Range TPR. Of these, 46 bridges have documented deficiencies; 32 are located in Larimer County and 8 in Weld County. Table II-4 presents the bridges in the NFR with documented deficiencies. r t OPFELSBURG r. HOLT & ULLEVIG E V I G Page 22 r r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan Table 11-4 Bridges with Deficiencies in the NFR M E yip rfa na}i °,,I! i�t �r ':;'Highway .,._. . Bti dgelStructut, ion s. Location; Bindge_Condition Larimer County SH1 B-16-AL Larimer County Canal Structurally Deficient 1-25 C-17-G Draw Structurally Deficient US 34 C-16-AK BN RR Structurally Deficient US 34 C-16-CZ BN RR Structurally Deficient — SH 287 C-16-D Dry Creek Structurally Deficient SH 14 B-16-EW 1-25 ML Functionally Obsolete SH 14 B-16-EX 1-25 ML Functionally Obsolete 1-25 B-16-FJ Windsor Res, Canal Functionally Obsolete IS 1-25 B-17-BC CS RR Functionally Obsolete 1-25 C-17-AS County Road Functionally Obsolete 1-25 C17-AT County Road Functionally Obsolete 1-25 C-17-EE County Road 16 Functionally Obsolete 1-25 C-17-El County Road 16 Functionally Obsolete 1-25 C-17-EL Draw Functionally Obsolete .• 1-25 C-17-ES CO RD 26 (Airport Drive) Functionally Obsolete 1-25 C-17-ET CO RD 26 (Airport Drive) Functionally Obsolete 1-25 C-14-j (minor) County Road Functionally Obsolete ^ US 34 C-16-AI Draw Functionally Obsolete US 34 C-16-AA Big Thompson River Functionally Obsolete US 34 C-16-AG Home Supply Ditch Functionally Obsolete US 34 C-16-AH Handy Ditch Functionally Obsolete US 34 C-16-k(minor) Buckingham Ditch Functionally Obsolete US 34 C-16-R Louden Ditch Functionally Obsolete US 34 C-16-Z Big Thompson River Functionally Obsolete .- US 34 C-17-EG 1-25 Functionally Obsolete US 34 C-17-EH 1-25 Functionally Obsolete US 34 C-17-E Sheep Draw Functionally Obsolete SH 287 B-16-AE Draw Functionally Obsolete SH 287 C-16-C Little Thompson River Functionally Obsolete SH 287 C-16-e(minor) Handy Ditch Functionally Obsolete SH 287 C-16-i (minor) Farmers Ditch Functionally Obsolete SH 287 C-16-S Home Supply Ditch Functionally Obsolete Weld County US 34 C-18-AV Ramp to US 85 Structurally Deficient •- US 34 C-18-BB US 85 Business Functionally Obsolete US 34 C-18-BH UP RR Functionally Obsolete US 85 C-18-N Latham Canal Functionally Obsolete ,., SH 68 B-16-EJ Fossil Creek Res. Inlet Functionally Obsolete SH 257 C-17-CZ Draw Functionally Obsolete SH 392 C-17-CS Greeley Canal Functionally Obsolete SH 392 C-17-ER 1-25 ML Functionally Obsolete r t II FELSBURG in HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 23 r 11.1 2025 Regional Transportation Plan .. 6. Accident History The state compiles annual traffic accident information for accidents occurring on the state highway system. Each year a report entitled "Accidents and Rates on State Highways" is published documenting the number and types of accidents on segments of state highway and an accident rate is calculated based on the number of accidents per volume of traffic. Table II-5 summarizes this information for locations on the state highway system in the NFR. These accident rates are based on the 1999 accident data. Table 11-3 lists the accident rates on the highways throughout the NFR. Table 11-5 Accident Rates on State Highways "State l e N} vp� v ,. +� � r 5k I I7�� nd s � n c �uur Segail:0 W r. ";.(.� ,��"'w�4a.„`t.7catith sip f 'F; :a= 3;T Atddtl 4tRate 1A US 287 to CO RD 54 D 4.26 ^ 14C US 287 to CO RD 5 2.66 Larimer-Weld Canal &Aspen Ridge Drive 1.86 l-25A CO RD 38 to SH 56 0.61 SH 56 to SH 60 0.5 SH 60 to SH 402 0.94 SH 402 to SH 392 0.88 r., SH 392 to SH 68 0.97 Cache La Poudre River to SH 14 1.82 SH 14 to MP 274 (near CO RD 52) 0.64 _ 34A Leave Roosevelt National Forest to CO RD 22B 1.36 CR RD 22B to I-25 2.58 1-25 to SH 257 0.69 SH 257 to 47'"Avenue 0.73 ^ 47°'Avenue to US 85 1.58 US 85 to CO RD 45 1.05 34D (US 34 US 34 Business to 47th Avenue 1.36 r— Bypass) 4710 Avenue to 8`"Avenue 4.41 11°'Avenue to 1°i Avenue 6.99 lm Avenue to South Platte River 2.47 _ 34Z MP 0 (JCT 34)to 10`" Street 6.27 56A CO RD 23 to 1-25 0.64 60B US 287 to leave Johnstown City Limit 0.63 68A US 287 to CO RD 38 2.59 85C Enter Greeley urban limit to south Platte River 1.10 Enter Evans City Limit to JCT US 85 Greeley B 3.47 JCT SH 34 to MP 273 (JCT SH 392) 2.02 '.. 85G JCT US 85 in Evans to 26°'Street 10.87 25°' Street (leave Garden City enter Greeley) to JCT US 34 4.96 Business Loop r-� 85H JCT US 34 Greeley Business Loop to JCT US 85 2.37 257A Milepost 1 to JCT US 34 1.4 FELSBURG HOLT & f" l ULLEVIG Page 24 r- 2025 Regional Transportation Plan r FSf# e'44�1aO i 7 PePO n ............................................................. HUB O .. `ACCId@11t,iRat@: ,.. _ JCT US 34 to MP 9 0.82 CO RD 66 (enter Windsor)to MP 14 (near CO RD 72) 3.40 257B JCT SH 257 to UCT US 34 1.0 263A JCT US 85 to MP 5 (near CO RD 49) 1.43 287C Boulder-Larimer County Line to JCT SH 56 1.27 CO RD 17 to Leave Berthoud City Limit 4.46 CO RD 10 to JCT SH 402 1.26 .. Leave Loveland City Limit to W 69'"Street 2.63 Louden Canal to Horestooth Road 3.06 Larimer County Canal No 2 (near Monroe Drive)to E. Vine Drive 8.06 P Lake Canal (near Alpine Drive)to CO RD 29 3.31 287Z JCT 287 to JCT FAP Rout 287 (Lincoln Avenue) 4.14 392A 1-25 Interchange(Windsor)to JCT 257 (Main Street) 1.13 ^ 392B Leave Windsor City Limit to JCT US 85 1.27 SH 85 to CO RD 39 2.10 402A UCT US 287 to 1-25 0.95 r C. Transit System Fort Collins r Transfort The City of Fort Collins operates fixed-route service which has been in operation since 1974 and continues to grow each year. In 1999 Transfort carried 1,431,779 passengers. This service operates on a "pulse" system wherein vehicles meet at a single point at regular intervals to transfer passengers. The three transfer centers in Fort Collins are: North Transfer Center located downtown at Mason/Maple; CSU Transfer Center, west of the Student Center; South Transfer Center, at the Square, Horsetooth and College. Transfort has two levels of service— CSU school year (approximate 160 days) and summer schedule (approximately 145 days). A lower level of transit service is provided during the summer schedule. Service operates Monday through Saturday. Sunday service is operated on a limited basis when CSU is in session. Fares for Transfort are $1.00 per ride and $.50 for seniors and disabled passengers. Youth (17 and younger) and CSU students presenting their CSU Student Activity Card ride for free. r . r r FELSBURG r il HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 25 7 i 1 I ) i l I I I I I 1 1 1 1 ) ) 1 ,I -10 Ida r� r� �� l a,� I IR. Q If1E n -- �— L i , 0,,it, ; , , _, fill i Z '` II LaM1E, IFS.. ` ��—TA „Li' 5IL• a71 ra— I � 1 fl y '' Ii , �7t'' N , �, . �Nghtliteshp ' 0 wt 55 A j 4::,-<_i. .111-1- -� 1 CIA i AiRo14shv ,� ,H; .� , t 1$-.r F y iFoxnols hp ILL- ° {�� h � I� -j NSs Ill.shuttle.shp - - I NRt.°Oinop ifIT I, , , ' I 0.. -{TA— t " L��----- 1 N IM1 ae I Rt3.shp �, -, N -- Rt.]:nv �� ,yy Ai p , Il l' ,_- 'Y?JR L, - h - Rtlshp --1t r I � 5 �Rt3 shp t \I Rt-ish ;1 Roads p , tl �� \ li I1 I ,. I r I.~I`P e)),\R I!.,nl.. Figure II-6 FELSBURG Fort Collins (Transfort) ( HOLT & DausNorth FlomoRange ry 9lvnnint Hon Air punll Bus Routes ULLE VI manning council oo 135 6/1/01 r Ima 2025 Regional Transportation Plan r Dial-A-Ride Paratransit service, known as Dial-A-Ride, has been operated by the City of Fort Collins since 1993. Ridership for Dial-A-Ride in 1999 was 65,168. Paratransit service is provided throughout the City of Fort Collins and is available during the same hours as the fixed route service, Monday through Saturday. Evening service is available seven days per week while CSU is in session. All service is door-to-door. Single-ride tokens are $2.00 and income-eligible tokens are $0.50 or $1.00. Fare assistance is available for persons who qualify, based on income. r FoxTrot Transfort initiated intercity bus service between Transfort's South Transit Center (STC) in Fort •-' Collins and downtown Loveland on March 1, 1997. One bus provides hourly service from 6:15 a.m. until 7:03 p.m. on weekdays and on Saturday. FoxTrot ridership in 1999 was 48,639. The fares are $1.00 for adults, $0.50 for seniors and disabled riders and the service is free for youth .. (17 and younger), CSU students and transfers to/from Transfort. Alternative Care Homes ~ These are four small board and care homes averaging three residents. They provide transportation to the residents on an as-needed basis and as the provider of last resort. One automobile is used for the trips. Generally, the residents' families provide transportation. Collinwood Assisted Living Facility There are approximately 90 clients. They have one minivan and one automobile for client transportation. Transportation is provided for medical non-emergency trips and for outings. ►� Columbine Care Center They have one van for the approximately 96 clients which is used for medical non-emergency ,.. trips. No personal trips are provided. Columbine Care Center West This facility has three vehicles available for approximately 150 clients. The vehicles are reserved for medical visits, but are occasionally used to transport spouses to the facility. The organization uses Dial-A-Ride for outings for residents. Elderhaus An adult day-care facility with no live-in residents, this organization has one van and provides transportation for approximately one field trip per month. r pr FELSBURG 11•• i HOLT & ULLEVIG V I G Page 27 r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan 4 Evergreen House A small board and care facility housing approximately five residents, one van is available for emergency transportation only. Fort Collins Health Care Center Transportation is provided for medical non-emergency trips, family visits, and outings for approximately 75 clients. Golden West Healthcare Center Pe The agency provides medical non-emergency transportation for approximately 50 clients and only does so under good weather conditions. Good Samaritan Retirement Village This facility, with apartments and nursing beds for approximately 100 clients, has two vans that provide door-to-door transportation for any wants or needs of the residents. Service is limited to Fort Collins city limits from Monday through Friday. r- New Mercer Commons The agency provides transportation for medical non-emergency visits and outings to its approximately 65 clients. Shamrock Manor This small board and care facility serving approximately 10 clients pays the fees for residents to utilize Care-A-Van and Dial-A-Ride. As such, transportation is provided for any wants or needs of the residents. Silver Hare Senior Board and Care This small board and care facility uses a privately-owned vehicle for transportation to medical non-emergency visits and some recreational activities. Most transportation needs are met by residents' families. Spring Creek Health Care Center 'a' The center provides limited transportation to its approximately 180 clients for medical non- emergency visits and scheduled shopping trips. FELSBURG �.� Nu HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 28 P 2025 Regional Transportation Plan Windsor Health Care Center The agency owns one van and provides transportation for medical non-emergency visits, shopping trips, outings and some personal needs trips for approximately 100 clients. "` Airport Express Airport Express operates an airport shuttle service from Fort Collins to Denver International Airport. Service is available from 5:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., seven days a week. The service operates approximately 15 round-trips per day. The cost is $14.00 one-way and $28 round-trip. SmartTrips NFRT & AQPC created SmartTrips in 1996. Its mission is to change driving habits of the citizens of the North Front Range away from driving alone. The program uses education, public awareness and incentive programs to meet their goals. The following services are provided: vanpool matching, carpool matching, personalized bus route assistance, bicycle and pedestrian information, telework and alternate work schedule information, guaranteed ride home program, and services for businesses. Existing successful programs within SmartTrips include the following: business outreach, youth outreach, university outreach, bicycle education and pedestrian education. r Greeley r The Bus The City of Greeley operates fixed-route and demand-response transit services, known as The Bus. The fixed-route systems serve the Greeley urban area, including the City of Evans. Nine fixed routes operate on a "pulse" system from 6:45 a.m. to 6:45 p.m. The pulse system is designed for vehicles to meet at a single point at regular intervals to transfer passengers — in Greeley it is the Downtown Transfer Center. The Bus also provides transfers in several different locations and evening service upon request. The evening service is scheduled after normal hours for the fixed-route and paratransit service. The evening demand-response service operates Monday through Thursday from 6:45 to 8:00 p.m., Friday from 6:45 to 9:00 p.m., and .. Saturday from 5:45 to 9:00 p.m. On Saturday, the system operates six routes from 9:45 a.m. to 5:45 p.m. P" The paratransit service for the elderly and the disabled began in 1992. The service is available for persons age 60 and older, or those who, by virtue of their disability, have difficulty using the fixed-route system. The service is for Greeley and Evans. r r FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 29 I - 1 1 I 1 1 F - 1 I 1 1 • ) I 1 I 1 - 1 - - 1- __--1 Jr .� l 1�1�Iii1C"��'� 11 ij n 11111�C��wi�, �a1tl F�r�lr IIIIIIt` sl_d!J♦`p.al y■�S O� Y1�� @ fl....it.a Bus Routes p11 !r�"r.i �` ;;;n;;a �.1-.1111''I��• 0-_u .ov...q �� 1 J r,... Tip a l _ ......�... 3 �' �tiivl: 11 ��1%e q 11�`�Iti��e:dirt t+w�w` n+ apt off ��r' aa,r 11 1 N4 W.zue st �YJ ri rl :7 \\1 1/� IE3 EE11a�i I � � s1afE �y�l` '' rural /\/7 / ;�Ladfi f "ice, ►'� ':11 I, x,111 - N8 11 1 � � rl n111m,IrriL illl `\�� 11 t 1111111 1uIv.w1 - N 9 z.tl St /ter. - 111 ` Roads 't' / — sa 4 T�q .t r� �lliail lll�≥ -L..... , mo St I �:�N1Fi":;/�i1 _ + w -��1 t iii �� q tip I W Ai 0-r ►!L"• III I+l ) _ I RA\Y'OI/IAI ION 1,UNSI.1I.ANIS,I'C. Figure II-7 FELSBURG Greeley r H O L T & North Front Range 'llanspnttaoon&ntr Quality ULLEVIG Planning Council Bus Routes 00-135 6/1/01 r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan Fares for the fixed-route service are $0.85 for adults, $0.40 for seniors, disabled and Medicare card holders, and $0.45 for youth five to 18 years of age. Children age four and under ride free. Various pass books are also available. Fares for evening demand-response service are $1.25 for a single ride or a fixed-route pass or ticket plus $0.40. Paratransit passes and single-ride tickets are also accepted for this service. In 2000, ridership on the fixed-route was 295,495 and ridership for paratransit and demand-response was 21,703. School District Transportation Services School District#6 serves Greeley, Evans and just outside the urban area. The district has more than 12,000 students and transports approximately 4,000 students daily. Recently, the district approached The Bus management staff looking for assistance in transporting students. The Bus staff is currently looking at several methods to see if they can assist District#6 without disrupting the fixed-route service. Airport Express/Express Charters Airport Express is based in Fort Collins, but operates scheduled service between Greeley and Denver International Airport (DIA) as well as charter service. Express Charters operates a fleet of over 30 vehicles, which are scheduled according to passenger demand. The passenger loads vary depending on the time of year. UNC has a large impact on business and the beginning and end of the school semesters and vacations are busy times for the company. Rocky Mountain Shuttlines Rocky Mountain Shuttlines is based in Greeley and operates service to and from DIA. The service is door-to-door in Greeley. Shamrock Yellow Cab Shamrock Yellow Cab is based in Windsor and serves Fort Collins, Greeley, and Loveland. The company averages two vehicles within Greeley at all times, with more during peak times. Shamrock Taxi provides service to many persons with disabilities and assists in loading and .. unloading to/from the vehicles. Shamrock also provides shuttle service to major events such as the Rockies games and parcel service. Centennial Developmental Services, Inc. (CDSI) This agency serves persons with developmental disabilities and contracts for direct transportation needs. CDSI also encourages clients to use The Bus fixed-route and paratransit services and purchases bus passes for their clients monthly. FELSBURG r.a 4HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 31 r pa 2025 Regional Transportation Plan Bonnell Good Samaritan Center This nonprofit nursing home has a range of facilities from skilled nursing care to apartments and serves approximately 500 clients. Transportation is provided for medical appointments. Residents are encouraged to use The Bus fixed-route or paratransit service for other trips, such as to the senior center or the Eldergarten program. Centennial Health Care Center The center has approximately 120 beds and provides long-term institutional care for the elderly and disabled. Transportation is provided primarily for medical appointments. Centennial patients use The Bus fixed-route and paratransit service for other trips. Kenton Manor This facility operates residential beds and independent living apartments. Transportation is provided primarily for medical appointments. The Villa at Greeley, Inc. Approximately 200 clients are served at this nursing home, residential treatment center and restitution center. Limited transportation is available to the clients. Y Loveland City of Loveland Transit (COLT) This municipal department, established in 1998, operates fixed-route transit and complementary paratransit services. COLT has implemented two local fixed routes and continues to operate Extra Special People (ESP), renamed COLT Minibus, a demand-response service for Loveland's older residents and persons with disabilities. COLT is also responsible for service coordination with the FoxTrot intercity bus route operated by Transfort under an intergovernmental agreement between the cities of Fort Collins and Loveland. Jitterbus, the first of two local fixed routes, began service in October 1998. A single bus operates hourly service on a clockwise loop through central Loveland and east along US 34 to l- 25. Scheduled arrivals and departures are coordinated with FoxTrot. Hourly weekday service on the second local fixed route, Tango, was inaugurated in January 2000. The route alignment is comprised of a one-way loop connecting downtown Loveland with neighborhoods in the west and southwest portions of the city. Scheduled arrivals and departures are coordinated with FoxTrot and Jitterbus. Scheduled service for both fixed routes runs from 6:38 a.m. until 6:38 p.m. Monday through Saturday. Ridership in 1999 for these fixed routes was 54,623. r imFELSBURG rd HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 32 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I ' r1 I ) I ► 1 1 i 1 I . 1 cif" e' 1 'Mliilsuu�i."j a�' r L I 7 L"r t CV N U N �I � 31 Q Legend _d Bus Routes w r NTango t, 1 n- iulilin ■ Jitterbus } mil. ^!I " Foxtrot A/Roads i ;II ohs t o a r; tlOw d :, ,fleel , _, I 1 i A , Likrv.1 r~ 16 I W.WOK ION — c.:ONyLL IAN IS.I\c,.. \ ' . I .. Y Figure 11-8 pFFLSBURG Loveland ' H O L T & North Float Rune Manning oun Atr Qoattty ULLE VI Manning council Bus Routes 00-135 6/1/01 2025 Regional Transportation Plan COLT Minibus provides complementary paratransit service required under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Three buses provide pre-scheduled service for individuals and groups making local trips within the city limits. Service hours for ADA-eligible patrons are the same as for the local fixed routes, while the hours for non-ADA eligible senior citizens are 8:30 a.m. until 4:30 ^ p.m. on weekdays only. The service carried 21,176 total passengers in 1999. Airport Express This service operates an airport shuttle from Loveland to Denver International Airport. Service operates between 4:20 a.m. and 6:20 p.m., Sunday through Friday and from 5:20 a.m. to 6:20 p.m. on Saturday. Approximately 15 round-trips per day are provided from Loveland. Trips cost $12.00 one-way and $24.00 round-trip. Rural Larimer County r Berthoud Area Transit (BAT) The Berthoud Golden Links, Inc. Senior Center is a private nonprofit organization which operates a demand-response transit service known as Berthoud Area Transit (BAT). The goal of BAT is to provide public transportation to meet the needs of the transportation-dependent, including the elderly, physically and mentally disabled, and all other members of the general public who have travel or mobility limitations. Transportation is provided to shopping areas, medical facilities, senior citizen and minority housing areas and to other community activities. BAT operates two vehicles —a 15-passenger van and a 25-passenger bus which is wheelchair accessible. The service generally operates from 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, with scheduled special trips on evenings and weekends. The service area includes Berthoud and Campion, Loveland, Fort Collins, Longmont, west to Carter Lake, south into northern Boulder County, and east into western Weld County. Transportation is provided on a 24-hour advance reservation basis. Different destinations are scheduled for different days of the week. No fares are charged for BAT services, however donations are suggested based on federal living standard measurements. For in-town trips, suggested donations are based on a sliding income scale. This scale is $2.00 for incomes under$7,000, $4.00 for incomes between $7,000 and $10,000, and $5.00 for incomes above $10,000. In 1999, BAT provided over 12,000 total one-way passenger trips. More than 60 percent of these trips were provided to people 60 years and older. Approximately 33 percent of the trips were for the general public. SAINT r Senior Alternatives in Transportation (SAINT) provides door-to-door transportation in Fort Collins and Loveland for seniors and people with disabilities. Volunteers drive their own cars to take riders to any destination and for any purpose within the service areas. SAINT operates from Monday through Friday from 8:15 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. and does not charge their clients a fee. SAINT provided 13,937 one-way trips in 1999. r- NIPFELSBURG i HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 34 2025 Regional Transportation Plan ^ School District Transportation r Three school districts provide bus service in Larimer County. Poudre R-1 serves Fort Collins and northern Larimer County. Thompson R2-J serves the Loveland and Berthoud areas. District R-3 serves the Estes Park area. The Poudre School District R-1 operates 100 buses, 20 of which are wheelchair accessible. The district provides all the Head Start transportation for the area. These students are mainstreamed onto regular and special education bus routes. Buses run an average of three routes per day. The Thompson School District R2-J operates just under 100 buses for student transportation. Approximately one-third of the buses are used for special education, which includes both school district and Head Start students. School District R-3 provides daily student transportation using approximately 20 vehicles. The district also provides transportation for the two Head Start programs that are in the service area. Shamrock Taxi r Shamrock Taxi service is based in Windsor and serves Fort Collins, Greeley, Loveland and Larimer and Weld Counties. Shamrock operates traditional taxi service, provides paratransit service in Fort Collins, shuttle services for DIA and transportation to sporting events. The company averages three to five vehicles within Fort Collins and one in Loveland at all times, with more during peak times (Friday and Saturday nights). Berthoud is served with the Loveland vehicles and the remainder of Larimer County with the Fort Collins fleet. Shamrock Taxi provides service to many persons with disabilities and assists in loading and unloading to/from the vehicles. Dispatching is from Windsor and is available 24 hours per day. ✓ Windsor Health Care Center This facility has approximately 100 clients and provides transportation for medical non- - emergency visits, shopping trips, outings and some personal needs trips. Prospect Park Living Center r The center, with approximately 50 clients, provides transportation for medical non-emergency visits, recreational activities and outings, church, and occasionally to families' homes. Berthoud Living Center One van is available to the approximately 50 clients at this facility. Transportation is limited to medical non-emergency visits and to facility-sponsored activities. r r opFELSBURG — (i HOLT & ■ ULLEVIG Page 35 r- 2025 Regional Transportation Plan Rural Weld County ts, The Weld County Transportation Program operates an extensive transportation service for Weld County residents. The Transportation Program is a branch of Weld County's Human Services .. Department which operates a wide variety of federally-funded program, described below. Employment Services of Weld County provides placement services at no cost to either the employee or the employer. Some clients on subsidized programs are provided with transportation to job sites for periods lasting up to 60 days. Head Start is a federally funded pre-school education program. Transportation is provided to both morning and afternoon sessions, to special events and for special services such as testing and health screening. Transportation is also provided to the members of the Head Start Parent Policy Board. Senior Nutrition Program delivers hot meals to 19 congregate sites throughout the county for the elderly. Most rural sites provide meals one day a week; several sites in Greeley, however, provide meals up to three days per week. Migrant Headstart Program consists of an educational program for the children of migrant farm workers during the summer months. The need for transportation for these children is substantial as they must be transported from widely scattered farms to program sites in either Greeley or the Tri-town area. Summer Youth provides classes for school-age children each summer. Clients are picked up at centralized sites in communities throughout the county and transported to classrooms in Greeley and Fort Lupton. r- Supplemental Foods Program transports foodstuffs to Greeley from warehouses in the Denver area. These trips are made one or two times per week. This food is then picked up by the recipients. There is also a small project to deliver food to agencies serving the homebound, low- income elderly. Inter-office Trips include those made for office and administrative purposes for the Department of Human Resources. Volunteer Program provides a subsidy for persons providing trips to the elderly and disabled using personal vehicles. Mini Bus Program provides transportation service to the elderly and handicapped residents of Weld County outside the Greeley city limits. This service is a true demand-response type of service with no set schedules or routes. The Mini Bus service is available at various times within the county. r FELSBURG (i HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 36 fog re 2025 Regional Transportation Plan r D. Bicycle And Pedestrian System Each of the three large communities within the NFR has identified a bicycle/pedestrian system which includes designated bike routes, on-street bike lanes, and off-street multi-purpose paths for both commuter and recreational uses. The community bikeway plans for Fort Collins, Greeley, and Loveland are illustrated in figures 11-9, II-10, and II-11, respectively. In addition, the NFRT & AQPC is currently updating its Regional Bicycle Plan, which will tie the cities' major bicycle routes together into a regional network. E. Freight Corridors The Freight Movement and Needs in the Upper Front Range Transportation Planning Region (HNTB, 1999) states that"while freight is moved in Colorado by truck, rail, pipeline and air, trucking and rail dominate the market...". This study also reports that the most important truck routes in the NFR are I-25, US 34, US 85, and US 287. The primary rail freight corridors are the Union Pacific's (UP) north-south mainline though Weld County and the Burlington Northern- Santa Fe's (BNSF) east-west line though Weld and Morgan Counties. According to this study, in 1993 approximately 9,483 thousand tons of commodity either originated or were destined to the NFR. Of this amount approximately 3,711 thousand tons (which were worth approximately 4,878 million dollars) originated in the NFR and approximately 5,772 thousand tons (which were worth approximately 5,772 million dollars) were destined to the NFR. By the year 2020, approximately 5,002 thousand tons of commodity are expected to originate in and approximately 8,072 tons destined to the NFR. This would be an increase of between 34 and 40 percent over the 1993 values. L r r' C r r OPFELSBURG /' HOLT & l ULLEVIG Page 37 — — �• Douglas Rd. F CR 54 N. 287 '. 1 •` 1 �•, s• h L• N ache •• TERRY 1 dl1 v� , LAKE ' •• \ m, — - Po CR 60G • _ —mare �.• CR 52 '' LONG Rive U • 'POND , I Gauntry ClubDr Ina � F I �: • � J� -� • •1• Mwnr.m ma.o•. N CR 50 •`• 4aceLAKE�sa • Wm O�J n ;CI Ilwy sl CmRn St -. U — , L 1 Q — 9w Vine Dc •- •! VIJD i l r`•V • •• I IR/8 c • CR 46 r• .. LaPorte Are. � • ` ,- `.e. -1_J - BNRR 01. 1- I Mountain w - Mulberry St. , ►. ' �b a „ 14'. • HORS ETOOTH CR 4d 'ros••c ae I. I • -- - # I 1 -7 CR 42 N 1 . Drake Rd. — ;,''r 'e aunt. 4, i' � 4,, \ ` • 'b. . _7:j- ' t Ik r•• CR 40 a WA V RREN F•• 1 Cc 38 Phil"' -t . 0 I•••• . Harmony Rd! h�� l L. MICR 3B r. M. I a r I •-� CR 36 Zit f = �• ii I_J Pm ml a E _ CR 34 / I— R N Trilby Rd. 'FOSSIL CREEK Li�� I ICC) 1'0 •fit -CR 32I I IIOR 32 s, IUcr U 2177 ! U CR 30 1 PM LEGEND - = Signed On-Street Bike Route - = On-Street Bike Lane Striped — - = Off-Street Multi-Purpose Path — Figure II-9 pi FELSBURG NorrhFroniRange Existing Bicycle Facilities ' H O L T & North Front Range &Air Quality ULLEV 10 Planning Council in the Fort Collins Area 00-135 6/1/01 1 1 I 1 1 ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 ' 1 • 1 I ci ic 1..� .— t\\ 3 st .owgw WORM' t;L.-1 L•. ,i , • »xr+ro I • r, • • wm /�� ..i a .L () _ � n r , \ i : 1"•• ii. w: 20.,s, ' ' m _' W. �, P•. 1.--.... man !4 .Ig wcw.0 •'�; • r ra ' sense I-- J C' EV85 , j,J•,,cAu ..A./•' N LEGEND = Signed On-Street Bike Route - = On-Street Bike Lane Striped JJ - = Off-Street Multi-Purpose Path - = Proposed Cycling Route Figure 11-10 piFELSBURG Existing Bicycle Facilities HOLT L T & : .wt i, u..ury ULLEVIG M..A,re...d, in the Greeley Area 00-135 6/01/01 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 . 1 1 0 £ �3l'. R LEGEND a u im �� . - = On-Street Bike Lane/Route " im —.-� *n • N. CR30 • 7-- •— - = Off-Street Multi-Purpose Path • F" I ��—__—. •• \ Ft.Collins-Loveland ' I I �� Q Muwciryl Aigw. I 57th Street O '.� Earbart Rd • I L [ I • -- S Rove HORSESHOE e ¢ Y—_ice_._71 ultE • q HORAKE IL jps-"-\ 0 LAKE - e LRT6 W�_.—._ ! _� . ossraads Blvd. .—. � • if �. 3Rh Sr �3MS[ •� CR2sE ..—..—__—_ I_—••—_• 1 , i n HOur9 � 29Th Sneer ' l �� • -R84� O on.i ^/ i/� _ R LW l� •� f uK1 ERR • • m Cr I: e I— 'TU _�• L4Ke 4 q ERN < p .J I i •w'Rsi LOVELAND 'S M�" w , i----- € � ' '4R • _____ _. ...._L___'-' ' ' .. • - 4 'Eisenhower Blvd • OW R i.6m Sr II • �.�: CR20 -- � - . 1st St. !r _-JN- � f • . . 4. I`�OEDECKER • I■■I C. •� Thompson ir / `� N !.) 1• i ; gjg } L. ti ( . C:—. J min St CRIB r , I /, / \ O b2 `l881 st I. CR 1BE 0 . Cr IJ•is CR 16 ca I6 I CR 16 n .- U £zet) cr Cr Figure II-11 piFELSBURG Existing Bicycle Facilities C' H O L T s$t North Float Range rimming coon S Atr qualify uLLev,c PlanNngCou dl in the Loveland Area 00-135 6/1/01 2025 Regional Transportation Plan F. Rail System ^. Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR): The UPRR is a Class One railroad with lines running both north/south and east/west through the NFR. The north/south line follows the US 85 corridor from Denver to Cheyenne, through the NFR communities of Greeley, Evans, and LaSalle. The east/west line runs from Fort Collins to LaSalle. The UPRR has over 40 mile of tracks in the NFR. Recently a merger between the Union Pacific and Southern Pacific Railroad companies was approved. A variety of commodities are shipped on these lines, including grain, automobiles, consumer goods, and coal. The Colorado Passenger Rail Study (Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., 1997) indicates that a 53-mile segment from Denver to Greeley is a good candidate for passenger rail service. In fact, the corridor from Denver to Fort Collins via Greeley or Boulder received a very favorable rating and was ranked the highest in their screening process. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF): The BNSF is a Class One railroad and, within the NFR it passes through Fort Collins, Loveland, and Berthoud. Additionally, the BNSF has a line running from Fort Collins, through Windsor, to Greeley, which connects with the UPRR line east of Greeley. The BNSF has approximately 70 miles of track within the NFR. The Denver to Fort Collins line, mentioned above, would make use of the BNSF line from Greeley to Fort Collins or from Denver to Fort Collins via Boulder, Longmont, and Loveland. Currently this section of track is only used for freight and serves the industrial customers in the Fort Collins Area. ^ Great Western Railway Company (GW): The GW is a Class Three railway which operates freight service from Longmont to Loveland, from Loveland northwest to Eaton (in the Upper Front Range Planning Region) and from Fort Collins to Greeley. The GW connects with both the UPRR and the BNSF lines in the NFR. G. Travel Demand Management Program One of the two key strategies for achieving the transportation goals of the region is to affect a shift in travel away from single occupant vehicles to alternative travel modes. In 1996, the Council established SMARTTrips as the regional travel demand management program to provide the focus for efforts to encourage alternative travel modes. SMARTTrips is responsible for employer and university based programs including an extensive vanpool program and rideshare matching services. In addition, the SMARTTrips program plays a key support and advocacy role, working with local communities in providing bicycle, pedestrian and transit system enhancements and implementing land use policies that support alternative modes. r orFELSBURG ii HOLT & ■ ULLEVIG Page 41 r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan Along with the SMARTTrips program, the Council has also instituted an ongoing monitoring system to measure the progress of the region toward its goal of reducing reliance on single occupancy vehicle travel. This monitoring is accomplished by development of a regional Mobility Report Card every three years. The report card documents results of a household travel survey and traffic counting for various travel modes. The 1998 Mobility Report Card, prepared in March, 1999, is intended to serve as a baseline to measure future progress toward a reduced single occupancy vehicle mode share. H. Aviation Facilities Three airport facilities exist within the North Front Range boundaries: The Downtown Fort Collins Airport, the Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport, and the Greeley-Weld County Airport (GXY). The Downtown Fort Collins Airport is privately operated, although publicly used, and therefore does not receive federal funding. One asphalt runway, 4,700 feet in length, serves this facility. The airport elevation is 4,935 feet MSL. The public airport in Larimer County is the Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport, located between Fort Collins and Loveland, with easy access to 1-25, at an elevation of 5,016 feet MSL. Two asphalt runways currently exist at the airport. The primary runway is 8,500 feet long and the crosswind runway is 2,273 feet long. In the past, the airport has serviced approximately 90,000 operations per year, with the emphasis in commercial flights. The Greeley-Weld County Airport (GXY), a privately run airport, is located three miles east of Greeley, in the approximate center of Weld County, at an elevation of 4,658 feet MSL. At the airport there are currently a variety of small businesses, a flight school, private hangars and a terminal. The airport includes a new 10,000 foot runway and a 5,000 foot runway. A new taxiway is scheduled to be completed by the end of 2001. Although commercial flight activity currently does not occur at this airport, the airport is a busy facility providing services to training, .. crop dusting, and private/corporate airplanes. r r r I r hFELSBURG HOLT iSt ULLEVIG Page 42 ^ 2025 Regional Transportation Plan III. DEMOGRAPHIC/ENVIRONMENTAL PROFILE 2025 Regional Transportation Plan ^ III DEMOGRAPHIC/ENVIRONMENTAL PROFILE A. Socio-Economic Data The travel demand model used to project future travel volumes relies on two primary elements of socio-economic data: households and employment. Previous planning efforts had developed these data for the region for the base year 1998 and the year 2020. From these data, projections for the year 2025 were developed in coordination with the planning staffs of each of the local entities. As part of the process, these household and employment data were further sorted into categories of low, medium and high income households and retail and non-retail employment. For modeling purposes, the NFR has been divided into 622 transportation analysis zones (TAZs) for which the household and employment data were compiled. 1. 1998 Household and Employment Data Table III-1 provides a summary of the 1998 household and employment data for the six larger communities and for the non-urban areas within Larimer and Weld Counties. As shown, at that time there were over 128,800 households and approximately 144,000 employees in the NFR. Over 86 percent of all households and over 95 percent of all jobs were located within the six larger communities. Table III-1 1998 Household and Employment Data 1 i f ( i 4.deg ( I F f t I, d 23 G. �� 3 L u. i £h y S' iR ! ��C�� 5�Ery T�t�� f P a '��. :. ��i{�� IOI�SeI10`IC��'v it �^t R$f"�v� �r�I� {k,(� : ��c 1. -_: i a. e..L,it ..�. �,�.i �� ...a a V..... r n s.._.-,.. .. ' � Berthoud Area 3,664 1,457 Evans Area 3,235 3,378 Fort Collins Area 50,788 61,312 Greeley Area 29,626 47,173 Loveland Area 20,973 22,808 Windsor Area 2,829 1,276 Larimer County (non-urban areas) 7,996 1,965 Weld County (non-urban areas) 9,706 4,628 TOTAL 128,817 143,997 r orFELSBURG (4HOLT & ULLEVIG E V I G Page 43 P` 2025 Regional Transportation Plan 2. Projected Households and Employment Table III-2 summarizes the household projections for future years 2005, 2010, 2015, 2020 and 2025. The 1998 data are also provided for comparison purposes. ~ As can be seen in the table, the number of households in the NFR are projected to increase annually between 2.0 and 6.0 percent in the larger communities, and from 2.9 to 3.8 percent annually in the non-urban areas of the counties. The overall projected increase in total households is approximately 2.8 percent per year. By the year 2025, it is projected that there will be approximately 269,000 households in the region. Table III-2 Projected Growth of Households Cla '-t {;.�rgt i�l zrd,{§-�+ y� t Er�{(i�ip," !` s'SPITE i �iNlnn.{ia3 P ii nav �i+-,=t I t§��?t ' POR Shy§ 5�1;�.E�i .uTi` �#`�7,t�e,,f, 9'ur ' ###### 3 F�`. , 1p �'� r ,######p i r° 9. tt P+ P try ,. ' �� iW a i o �y nit' ,/�I+nual7�%R w ¢ + tytl u i 7�r((.. i�a Z l i ' ° '' t 'v a Iny ��'�.�i7ti 10 see, itipi : m � a`i a m !d kid 3� i tF � '°� � �� x(199 - I� r� dc+1 �tq "� t t iliN! � � r c i�i�„ i t i ! 19 µE'200#,, i �1J1U 201µj; 20213 x Ts iii '21J45 2025) Berthoud Area 3,664 4,571 5,219 5,868 6,516 7,164 3,500 2.5% Evans Area 3,235 5,942 7,876 9,810 11,744 13,678 10,443 5.5% Fort Collins Area 50,788 60,281 67,062 73,842 80,623 87,404 36,616 2.0% Greeley Area 29,626 37,070 42,387 47,705 53,022 58,339 28,713 2.5% Loveland Area 20,973 27,397 31,986 36,574 41,163 45,751 24,778 2.9% Windsor Area 2,829 5,591 7,563 9,536 11,509 13,482 10,653 6.0% Larimer County (non-urban) 7,996 11,647 14,254 16,861 19,469 22,076 14,080 3.8% Weld County (non-urban) 9,706 12,588 14,646 16,705 18,763 20,822 11,116 2.9% TOTAL 128,817 165,087 190,993 216,901 242,809 268,716 139,899 2.8% r. r . FELSBURG C4 HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 44 r- r- 2025 Regional Transportation Plan Table III-3 provides a similar summary of employment projections in the region. Overall, employment is projected to grow at an even greater rate, approximately 3.1 percent per year. Table III-3 Projected Growth of Employment 3 7 ! k pr7ta° .: 1 "fit 1 $ �"{k 1:a1 F "� ln�i01001116$ �.- '��'�d} 'hid „�"�°{-,L `�v�{ h, ,.� . a,g!`,,e P �kv ra 1t.. athis +�1 ",7 ,' }#k:/9�pi'��=.. x `aYp ' ��+, ,l � "i�1 0 :�'mR, IF x 9 t.,a `"T t �: na .aa 1% S !' "! ( !f R in p I "!Id 4'SH ry it y, ��,�p" ! �Ifi i�ra'�1+, (" Er.. 5, �'nr �i1r " !'4 f( " " s�' .: i " � "� 6F9d � Increased. .pp� i5l.,iced r ld "`!„ f'" 6 , ,lid 9 i v "P a d �fi irla + fl � tuk i `�rYtr i9 � '4 �t'' �f+� 4�� ,�! S 1998 " 2005 T71 +2010 2015 . t„3,2020 k 2025f`! 2025 , -ii 2 )lmia irdilr :�i .,..t n:...i. d 0,,,i._, x ,t.... e :: . �w ..:el , : mv d.. ilnt! ai,,a5441114i Berthoud Area 1,457 5,622 8,597 11,573 14,548 17,524 16,067 9.6% + Evans Area 3,378 4,511 5,319 6,128 6,936 7,745 4,367 3.1% Fort Collins Area 61,312 76,141 86,733 97,326 107,918 118,510 57,198 2.5% Greeley Area 47,173 60,119 69,334 78,550 87,765 96,981 49,808 2.7% Loveland Area 22,808 33,925 41,866 49,807 57,748 65,690 42,882 4.0% Windsor Area 1,276 1,849 2,259 2,669 3,079 3,488 2,212 3.8% Larimer County (non-urban) 1,965 3,617 4,797 5,977 7,157 8,337 6,372 5.5% • Weld County (non-urban) 4,628 5,632 6,348 7,065 7,782 8,499 3,871 2.3% TOTAL 143,997 191,416 225,253 259,095 292,933 326,774 182,777 3.1% B. Environmental Profile The most significant transportation related area of environmental concern in the NFR is air quality. The NFRT & AQPC was designated by the Governor as the lead air quality planning organization for the Greeley/Fort Collins area in June of 1993. The Council, in cooperation with the Colorado Air Pollution Control Division, CDOT and local governments, is responsible for the development and implementation of the Fort Collins and Greeley elements of the State Implementation Plan, as well as other transportation related air quality planning projects in the NFR. 1. Non-Attainment Areas Both Greeley and Fort Collins experienced violations of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for carbon monoxide (CO) in the late 1980's and, as a result, their previous non- attainment status continued with the passage of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1991. CO levels have improved substantially in the 1990's, and Greeley was redesignated to attainment status on May 10, 1999. Fort Collins is in the process of developing a request for redesignation, which is expected to be completed by the end of 2001. FELSBURG r• C4 HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 45 r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan Motor vehicle emissions constitute the major source of CO emissions in the NFR. A number of strategies are being administered to limit CO, including a Basic Inspection and Maintenance program, oxygenated fuels, and aggressive alternative transportation programs. These include transit, bicycle, pedestrian, carpool, and vanpool programs. In addition, extensive public education is taking place at the local and regional levels in an effort to encourage citizens to use alternative transportation modes. 2. At Risk Areas The NFR does not contain any Air Quality At Risk Areas, which have been defined in the Rules and Regulations for the Statewide Planning Process and Transportation Planning Regions as, "an area ... where violations of ambient air quality standards for small particulate matter may be imminent unless increases in emissions in the area are mitigated." r r r r r- r IPFELSBURO (4HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 46 2025 Regional Transportation Plan IV. TRAVEL DEMAND ANALYSIS r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan IV. TRAVEL DEMAND ANALYSIS ra A. Overview In order to evaluate the effects of growth upon the NFR's transportation system, the NFRT & AQPC prepared regional travel demand projections based on socio-economic forecasts provided in Section III. The NFRT& AQPC has prepared a regional travel demand model which provided estimates and forecasts for the following three scenarios: • 1998 Base Year— 1998 socio-economic data and the 1998 roadway network. • 2025 Existing Plus Committed (E+C) —2025 socio-economic forecasts with the existing roadway network plus roadway improvements whose funding has been committed. • 2025 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)— 2025 socio-economic forecasts with the existing roadway network plus committed roadway improvements plus roadway improvement projects that are planned to be in place by the Year 2025. Planned projects include two components: the Fiscally Constrained Regional Transportation Plan that is detailed in Section VI of this report and additional improvements that local governments expect to implement within the next 25 years. Although many of the improvements in project categories other than roadways can be anticipated to have the effect of reducing roadway travel demand, these reductions have not been quantified on a project-by-project basis; therefore, the 2025 vehicles trip forecasts have not been reduced for this scenario. The remainder of this section provides a summary of travel demand forecasting results for the three scenarios described above. Year 2005 and 2015 scenarios have also been prepared for air quality analysis, but these interim year forecasts are not discussed in this report. B. Travel Demand Growth r Vehicle miles of travel (VMT), the total distance traveled by all motor vehicles per day, was used as a gauge to measure the forecasted growth of travel in the region. Table IV-1 shows the _ estimated 1998 and forecasted year 2025 VMT for the regions three major urban areas and the region as a whole. r r r FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 47 2025 Regional Transportation Plan Table IV-1 Growth in Vehicle Miles of Travel PeW eflt Gt`4wffl .. Fort Collins Area 2,693,000 5,559,000 106% Greeley Area 1,547,000 3,579,000 132% Loveland Area 1,518,000 3,729,000 146% Other Areas 5,503,000 12,909,000 135% NFR Region 11,261,000 25,776,000 129% These forecasts show that regional VMT is 2% 1% .. projected to grow by 129% between 1996 . and 2025. This VMT growth compares with household growth forecasts of 10% and 1998 employment growth forecasts of 127%. ROADWAY LOS y A systemwide measure which is a good indicator of the transportation impacts of growth is level of service (LOS), which is a T% i2% measure of the quality of traffic flow on a roadway. As illustrated by Figure IV-1, a 2025E + C significant decrease in traffic operations ROADWAY LOS would be expected if no improvements are made to the transportation system. The "'a " percentage of roadway links operating at LOS F (highly congested conditions)would O = LOS NB/C increase from less than 1 percent in 1998 to E •:I = LOS D/E 7 percent in 2025, while those operating at = LOS F LOS D or E (nearing capacity)would increase from 2 percent in 1995 to 12 percent in 2025. Figure IV-1 Roadway System LOS 1998/2025 r r r. r FELSBURU r I HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 48 r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan The LOS results for the 2025 RTP scenario, 5% as shown in Figure IV-2 indicate an 1a3 improvement over the results for the 2025 n = LOS A/B/C E+C scenario; however, there will still be n = LOS o/E significant congestion on the system. The - = LOS F percentage of roadway links projected to operate at LOS F will decrease from 7 percent to 5 percent, and the percentage of Figure IV-2 Roadway System LOS links projected at LOS A, B, or C will 2025 Build increase from 81 percent to 82 percent. r r C. Year 2025 Forecasts Figures IV-3 through IV-6 show Year 2025 daily traffic volume forecasts for key roadways in the Fort Collins area, Greeley area, Loveland area, and other parts of the region. These maps show both the 2025 E+C forecasts and the 2025 RTP forecasts. A comparison of the two 2025 forecast scenarios shows that the most significant differences are traffic volume increases on major roadway with widening assumed in the 2025 RTP scenario, including parts of US 34, Larimer County Road 17, Larimer County Road 38/Weld County Road 74, and Mulberry Street in Fort Collins. r A P— !'",? r r. 4pFELSBURU HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 49 r 1 r q Do alas Rd. LJIA CRS/ prci I267 u.vlu}., L id "'•' '-��'..�°°„ Jua•Iz7 •ague �raea.. _ 1. cR sz 11.3/23..7 ••• \N- ' •— ra r J •M3rsss "+ w.wry w \ N j Y. tlib ) 9_,AI . .. mews*,rvnw l9 nI A ,. la CR sa cl, N S r ? �� j Q• C .• v. 3EEaY,aET j I ; •r..—•I I ° '^ vin.or. 1...25.31. •L nELToE tl 16.1291 vine or. r' T3ym4'� I'CR48 le•'� d.;II r r A0VATION3L�0 , . a 91.01571 ----_ \ CFI 11LIIA N..:29.6/28.9 • A •T— • N ..a..• J 511113 -) . +j 14 • WUMWA A N /J ) \\�\\ - e mills] Mulberry ` \"�, -seA/60.1~ 14.47x77 ,{ C 1/ \ � . r,l4M1s11 ,, / ~� ..;r—j...1- <\ :f��_1 1 P..' T I �� EllzebMII SI, .� �</V. A 11\\\\'l. 4 RORSLI s w..a L ••L^—..j 9. l ••CRM Prospect Rd. n - I n1Ara�Al Is1 z`"x`I aES I uen7a) F41.15/40.01Swans.1 \'1 I^ a .kci ,j •L..i 11 9 + I , :,3, T �( i CR02 es ° 44 . :Rtl Cr '1'1 t,, 4 [jr/�`y 1241x1 ]I.MI! IG� •7 RA ,_ ca 1 CR 40 '3114I.7 lh Rd. 1N.U4A7 CR/0 ..-37777 CR38E • g - I I •� �� f.n i A Harmony Rd=h_161/1&7 0.44.1 59.UN.1.. CR38 f / URA CR 98 13aY1l.il w .j j—' _� L • . 68 1( (.. r l -, ? aq : 11201.31 CR38 17.4173 1111 L...� .I�J 2� • • i ti y • � i i 4 I I — CR.L• 2c5/19110.9/l9A Trilby Rd. ^ ` l : \ �n t L �._ I .Lit F 4JM9.7 „-:::14:-:-.a74.� LR 92 l 'Lit i (' CR 9z P. co 7 N Q Q \ gU U U U 2B7 U Q g A U CR 30 Iscsratal Lincoln Ave ss N I.5.'.. lnag j MouMeM 'w. ,Z / I .ti 1 z[ tillm Ee i Ze v` r do ssw3s3 •8 . Mulberry St. a LEGEND i 11x711931 I 'man x7= Na Builtl/Fiscaly Consiraned Plan Laurel Sr. 2025 Average Daly Traffic Volume Forecasts ssw 1M1/SJ31 0 V A — NOTE:Volumes in Thousands rl Figure IV-3 ri FELSBURG ........ ..").---,y,-- N Year 2025 Daily Traffic Forcasts O H O LT a"^�." .eo.ee7 ULLEVIG in the Fort Collins Area wewawn.aeliw r 00.1558/01/01 1 - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 •--1 SLAV en se }S 4 S t5 Rn s. g Nest eM s. as ]asst Ph St et 4 v10n St St -� hsal6s1 Ay 46 102 s. { RE ® w.vnAI w i 1 p ,q rzis s 1 a 1 6. IS .� • l V U tlM)5 - 4 St.. n.une' ff E E E 151 Sr FE : 10.5I11A ' ]Ion Y a L� LR I �` , n s� 172 St ,.12L1}l _..i ' 1 V ,8, 1 il K - L 1}2/161 213/126 A rg. UNC 10.]/11.1 F.^ ® 6 r 10.6/10.6 I =1St 12.027-7 a4 4 4 4 19th CR 84 12a]}f • ' 162/166 W -p- A F , UNC I w= e.. 273/27 ' • ses Fel.•• JJia22 PARK ..: If.]RBs St _ PARK 3)3/1).2 � •. , n Yt��U n 1 IIIIII,I1 LY n Cfl B3 • Av [1P1 1 NPtu CI 62 n.tro.t i 7 1 .� wans SM Sti I, `i �... I C.. ... nwan 1 5}V558 vsxc�z �\ M Sf. -OYRYYpltitllE I nR AIRPORT •• 5]159.2 6+ ^••w1025f. ,.�� tans ��rxawa7z7®iicaa 6 .r r _ (, �yJy•�p9cy pap YpYoyia n I ••' • � 458'15.1 3 r 4 2 rat S1 \■�� -!®RG55•J 9919a I r^ Pwd2�18 • �..�. L: / e 20 farcnascaac una CIS • •w• , 1 1 pp x tans II/ .vnol:ulawzevYtk+Yaa . ( .._ g ��Ef99giaga 7741'1 Ian s. U 3635]3 • I : I ' I •Vz^ 9 Ai Fr3•Ixy tyYt list ' —1 —A. . ..Ar•°41 a�..� � ul/UA � I:2/ gg �1�• ' L •, �. W.zaps Air �r.A 7C4 '•L.. WM St g �= • -- 75 728.2 l 4'xYV3 .. .._ 1 e T ` � Ii4 yy' '4 50.150 / a %MA U R 36.5 i.• 71161 5 M �. • C}J29 y' �..J e 17 I ,Y �yFRI �. I i ,• , r Jl I• • 6.d1 a, �..�. ..� .l.,Rl on �i�SJ.fR/�.I� n lil/tld� L.._.._. �• CRY 34 v LI .IRS � �._..J Q $ ye _..I � ..._.. r .� 8 329 St. IitNt3l �115.w2tzl 16.2.16.7 15.5/16.1 LEGEND ',MUM i= No Build/Flscaty Constrained Plan 2025 Average DailyTraffic Volume Forecasts NOTE:Volumes in Thousands Figure N-0 4 FEOSBUR6 ''�� Year 2025 Daily Traffic Forecasts uuavlc tT"°°'"" in the Greeley Area CO,.]3/30/01 1 1 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ` 1 1 317/40.0A 74Kr `?,, EISA 13.2/7.3 Cfl 10 1z1/L] Imams] ITAAP101 nth sr .---.1d} w (r Ra uw-Imelvei C II I 3 . 23rd&. I n F i r 5 Q e' .1=7:ila' LAX! �j i gi lcuu.] n _ \ - /' 1 &n S.2 EWE 342-4. 'ir3 ._.._..�,� snns L - k � i cA z@ . . n y ]s 19 f I : i/ ] itt �..� i r.._. z2„,„,,„,, u 129.2,3031 t :,\.....„, � r 1 ff,�� S I ._.._.. .._.. ]>un]9 "run": iaw i• 3 �' i avnf elh& 1s1Wfb ;I �' .E Icmr <D mo. 71h St r ✓in. - ..:f ln,u _ [y9; � ; n.]re{ 1..��51.]K0.1 GWBw a <_ Y i ens 4i '1J __ �r SEEINAET nn sc V TNl9 PMiE EUN I..n� ADOTONAL 11i \.�;]CMp 20 40A/103i lylA 14.3/1101 VOLUMES re s. rpm, J Isf&.11iUls.iJ i r} ._.i — Ila15A Ir MUr.. ; �V"C a> * 0, ff iaT�=¢\ r + � 1 ran sd E7 ... wr re �nan 30.7/30A `41 p 1299/3].51 a _ mess �� r .._.y .._..I� u cw ree �� 1 �? N -f .��._.�.__..._....._....�._� U CF r1/ ) -' CR re ! CB to LEGEND - I 15.815.61 ¢ Ina" ygTn 1116/151116/15.51Ixx.xaxal= No Build/Fiscally Constrained Plan A u 2025 Average Daily Traffic Volume Forecasts NOTE:Volumes In Thousands P Figure N-5 FELSBUBfi "),.\ Year 2025 Daily Traffic Forecasts ll „uaLT ej ' °-"" uevlc In the Loveland Area .I"1/01/01 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 - 1 _1 - 1 I 1 1 ‘7 '��'(�'�' .. w it', WLR/W 'J, .� �.tA�1I11111IE . WC,aB Mai_ °d - Er 5 a 11 '�III . 1 I R al Wpi B, 0,a_ 4 MUM �Il■'- . WeRsu Ili 4esil\1� .' —S`l a■WLRBB i f'-, l': ill , fi i■ 2a2.a ■■■-- ,7 m ,(,ENE. _ - v Imr1 v--Ire on,„„^sow�resr ji RR -, ral 1 . [m �� r � 41 z ;ff 1 r•t IAA�...riy :_ ,l35" G71 x 4rini—.u.m- �qyp‘ 153/1571,'.C,s � � ..sxid��*ki t. I. �11.11�.�©�' '�� nr Jw 71.N/d.l AM ,ii i 1 i .121/133 . fi 11.1 .t':, �� !a�,i�f��IU tx�Brl�g i I-�nn,�..��r MILN LCRxe�4Y �.'.I�IDll�l iPMIP 1M WCRsz �i x^" :, CAM. ■■ LCRI ii 16.91 'ball ' 1: ii r'j �Ate�� '';:w `r 1L�1ri _""IH� -aii�1► All■IIirr _ MIR 11 a_ _ Iit'rlN�ril 'pI 19.11].6 �`�.rF • "^■. LEGEND t f � r Y' �� - ,•1i i �� y�i�.- wxR� �xxsnccxl= No BUIINFlscalN Constrelned Plan •"' I J 9 LCR4 _ Ijir ®�I �, •�• 111,11 wen. 2025 Average Daily Traffic Volume Forecasts ' j . .• V r rir i rrMl- Wcnss NOTE:Volumes in Thousands LABIMER WUWT 1,� .�1 p ..�._.. p .. ¢y ,r ¢y ¢y ¢y BOULDER COUNT m • L••1 5 3 3 3 Figure N-6 piFELSBURG ."7......›"7"."\ Year 2025 Daily Traffic Forecasts NOLT 6 sup Fi ry uuevw Nonla DAN" Outside of the City Areas 0O-1]56pµ 2025 Regional Transportation Plan V. VISION PLAN ^ 2025 Regional Transportation Plan r-. V. VISION PLAN The Vision Plan includes all of the transportation improvements identified as being needed in the region by the year 2025. All projects were initially identified through the local entities, which submitted project descriptions using a standard form to ensure uniform and consistent information. As briefly addressed in the Introduction of this report (see Figure 1-2), all projects were categorized and then carried through a prioritization process to establish a list of projects ranked in order of their importance to the region. A. Project Prioritization Process The project prioritization process that was developed as part of the 2020 RTP process was "- refined by the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and the Council. The entire methodology is documented in a report entitled Project Prioritization Process, May 2000. A key premise in the project prioritization process is that projects should be prioritized only against projects of a similar nature; only in this manner can a set of evaluation criteria be uniformly applied to projects for comparative purposes. Thus, six (6) project categories, as defined below, were established. • Transit - Projects in this category would include vehicle purchase, service expansion and operations, and supporting facilities/infrastructure (such as transit transfer centers, maintenance facilities, shelters, etc.) for regional bus service, city bus systems, and paratransit services such as special providers and the regional vanpool programs. • Rail - Projects in this category would include any projects which would enhance service or supporting facilities/infrastructure for passenger rail, would maintain and improve the rail system for freight haul (including intermodal facilities), and would improve rail/highway grade crossings. • Bike/Ped -These projects would include all projects with a primary purpose of providing for safe and efficient bicycle or pedestrian movement. They could include travelways or supporting facilities such as bike racks, storage lockers, etc. r- • Travel Demand Management -These projects would be those which provide planning, marketing, education, and management support for programs which will reduce growth of VMT and will encourage a shift in mode from SOV travel in the region. Examples of such programs could include ridesharing, parking management, and telecommuting. • Transportation Systems Management -This category should remain flexible and would include studies and projects which provide support to the infrastructure system. It could include projects and studies related to issues such as intelligent transportation systems (ITS), access management, traffic signal systems, etc. All planning studies would be included in a pool within this category. . FELSBURG (4 HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 54 r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan r • Highway/High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) This category would include all projects which have a primary objective of improving the infrastructure for safe and efficient vehicular .- movement. Such projects could include new roadways, roadway widening (including general purpose and HOV lanes), intersection and access improvements, shoulder widening, and park-n-ride lots. Seven (7) evaluation criteria, as defined below, were developed to be applied to all project categories and to ensure that all of the goals of the plan were addressed by at least one of the criteria. • System Continuity - Projects should complete gaps or improve incomplete or inadequate segments of the regional system. Emphasis should be placed on inter-regional corridors and on regional connections (major origins to major destinations) rather than local connections (within communities). a • Congestion Mitigation - Projects should reduce congestion by capacity or operational improvements, or by reducing demand through trip reduction or shifts to alternative modes. • Safety Enhancement - Projects should enhance safety by addressing an existing hazardous situation, a potentially unsafe situation, or a transportation facility of substandard design. a • Multi-Modal Enhancement - Projects should enhance more than a single mode of travel or should improve connection between modes. • Environmental - Projects should improve the quality of the environment in the region (air quality, noise pollution, water quality, energy consumption, etc.) and impacts should be able a to be mitigated. • Implementability - Projects should have evident public support; should be supported by an adequate public facilities ordinance, a transportation impact fee program, or a similar program; and should work in conjunction with and be compatible with the applicable comprehensive plans in the region. • Cost Effectiveness - Projects should reflect a positive relative benefit/cost ratio, and should minimize long-term operating and maintenance costs. FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 55 r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan Although these criteria are applicable to all project categories, it was recognized that the assessment measures for a criterion may differ for each project category. Further, it was recognized that the relative importance of each criterion could be different for the various project categories. Therefore, a scoring and weighting system was developed for each project category. Scoring guidelines were prepared to provide guidance on how a project should be scored (with scores ranging from 0 to 3) for each evaluation criterion. These scores are then multiplied by the assigned weight for each criterion and summed to obtain total weighted points for a project. The weighted points are used to rank projects within each project category. These ranked projects ^ comprise the Vision Plan. B. Vision Plan Tables V-1 through V-7 summarize the Vision Plan projects for the six project categories and also present their prioritized rank within the category. These tables include a brief project identification, the estimated cost (in constant dollars), and the rank of the project within the category. (Actual scores of all projects are provided in Appendix F.) At the top of each table, projects that are committed in the current North Front Range 2001- ,- 2006 Transportation Improvement Program or, in the case of Transit, represent a continuation of existing service, are listed. There are 381 uncommitted projects in these six project categories. In several cases, there is overlap between projects in two different categories; in those cases, the corresponding project in a different project category is indicated in the column entitled "Additional Category", and project cost totals are adjusted to avoid double counting. The total cost of uncommitted projects in the Vision Plan is an estimated $4,498 million. '^ 1. Bicycle/Pedestrian Projects The Vision Plan includes 59 uncommitted bicycle/pedestrian projects, with a total cost of$66.3 million. These projects encompass a variety of types, including bike lanes on roadways, off- road multi-purpose paths/trails, and grade separations. The right-hand columns of Table V-1 provides project cost totals for projects on the State Highway system (less than 9%) and off of the State Highway system (91%). The majority of the projects propose the addition of bike lanes on roadways, many in conjunction with roadway widening projects. 2. Highway/HOV Projects There are 211 uncommitted Highway and High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) project with a total cost of $2.22 billion. Nearly half of these projects, representing more than $1.0 billion, are on the State Highway system. Additionally, the cost of off-system projects that are on corridors designated as Regionally Signficant is more than $320 million. A review of Highway/HOV project rankings reveals that a majority of the higher ranked projects are on the State Highway system or on other Regionally Signficant Corridors, while projects that are not on Regionally Signficant Corridors tended to receive lower rankings. The Highway/HOV projects in the Vision Plan are quite diverse, ranging from intersection improvements and minor widening to major widening or relocation of key regional roadways. OPFELSBURG P' C4 HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 56 r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan r„ TABLE V-I BIKEIPEDESTRIAN PROJECTS On-Ss.n Rank Project N ��AdditiGml Submitting Agency Project Cost Est. On State CumulativeCos Cumulative tem Oft-System system? Cost Cost Cost • �'TIR:I:::''': ':':: ' :' relit Col*5:'c.•7:.':'' :is I :l?odd8dre LW,.s: :.:' ;3!;000: 3300.:: • .. . ..... .... . ...... fWrMpE7 ........... ..... •:Fi•§•':'' Yes::•:•.'•St•'J1G•d.::'f/6;l:WP' 'i::•:::Y:%. : -lip:. _ .. 3303 .;. .. ..: . ...... ......... . 3333... ... .....:..::::.. . ... ......:.:�.....'.:...... ..............� 3333 .. ..,,. .....:.. . 03'30'.:, _E.ans:.;!:. •':::0000 gk@?eNlpenarom,i3keslde?ark3q US95.: ::�::: ::��.: ..::: _'��_i,F.lof vpo;:"rid';":i:S;::32gsoo9�a.!:!':� .i.�''.... :�:i:•S1S?L900 . ... 333 . ,_• :: 3003 .. ... . 3303... 3030... —3333.... 3333 ...�.•liP 3 333. .. .. .. ..•3333 ..:�.� :,Greek... :i:..:'.i;i" PG0Cn AWe:TrOh Eb04re,W'eeeNMGh.:T:: 11:''':::: : . .. ... .. <. 3333. ... . : :..:...:.. ........ ... 3333. 3333.4...:. ... ... : ... . .. . ... 3333 . .3333 • 3333 �... ..... .'�' ...� ... :. .::. ..: ::..:.:.':':.::::.............3333. 0333.. ..::.�.. :_.5257: . ':gYai"' ' '':55aiaoa'`:': "i i��•� 's3ga,99d :.371• '::• :.• d: :' LrniranceFkdlmks idrTranste!:4+e3sln'•Dow-rr:..•.• :::: ::'':.::Sst.tv0: I•Ma• .0ii6o:::i4 :• ' :::Si22,noa �� 333 :...�':' • �;..'�. ^ , • .:.:.:: !t'k i••• -snoreyemgdtsi:tann! ::...fityRoa0i17 S: :dt:.::• : :'::: •:.: .:.: :::.:�:.:'..:. .•.•. .. .. 3333: 3,3,3, :.nP: :: '..:.' ::0a.:.<-: f"•::":: :.::'1:•: 00' ::9TRfEi:i :::::,41.4;P00�::..:.:E.:.OtlO::�''�. 3'33 ... •... .. .. '.0030 .....'3030. *niY:RdAd::':J:'.i.:'::.;::.Erg:i.f: '.::i: :: :.. ::: 3333 : TIP 0::: ::: . .; .: r ,: ..rflWi't{'p o'` •.::. ... . ... .... .. .. 3303.:• : .. .. 3333 3'330.., :'> `:y ::: ' '::":: :' .. 3 �. . � ::•0333..�3330. .::� 't�:i ,.l'. :: �(...f,,.4l .$fr;af:tidn'25m:Aveouk to:29rd`,ilvwige''.i.::;::;:::':':!.: . .. ... .� .. 3333. ' ;. ' ..... ..................... . ..;4sm9. .::bd 0000::::::5142 D00 �"'::�Yc::E::::::'S/e3,4?00 �.•n ,3333 .....: ne,::::1;;;:.`'. :.' 003'3:':......�:Love/:..... 333..•&kelr.eil:UndbiPaSf;U$�.?#K4sf;ol.W,heil;AvlHue.':';:: 7yFA70 ':::4:::', ::Sf 6t 900 :S�t132�� r„ .• .. .'�: �.. ..•�.:::..:.. : .. .. :.. ... ... . � . ;....: ...: .. ....:.. .: ... t. .900';:;:; :::�:::'::S: , .§ `?IP•i•: ':Greele:. . :•'tA71e'f.'ed 8tdOe:Ctossrnt7 .. .3330 .. : .. . ... ..... . . .. 3333..... .. .. . .3330 3333:: Y. ... :::$1 38A0 ' ::Yld: :::::' ... �...� 3333:. 3333 p C;osbma:flNC,;9Nh Avenljb ef.22M'81r2,eY;;;0;003 .. ... .. 3333.. .•1.,.b�r900::i ':'':: :::03'0 3628.G00 _ 3333. 3333 ._ __ ....��.�. _ TIP TOTAL $1,651,000 $1,031,000 $622,000 .. ... 3333 3..330 ..: .. 0033.•..:.; .:: .:::�.:<.:'.'i:..::' ...<. 0000. ::::';::':.:Y1llscniSVnue.£i3mAortec.tnQ;tSUee4;WMden'ItifBike. enes 003.::::::•:::.:•:. '. .:03 33 ..:300 0 :..:..:..333;.;:'..c:.. ::: .: .. :�'..::-_....1•2 ..<tP-x5.. .:....3333•:. ..wvdam:..:..,.:... .:.. . ....... '...;.:.:.:,:::•:•:"•':'33.. .';�.:•�. :;..;::.:'.;.:::.:::,;..::..: OEHt; ':'liao':';::.::.:::::SS0�008::.:: ... :.'.: ;'.::: .�..::.:.:. ....::.... ... :'ent.:,... ... ..` ::es TL..'..:'::....... . ..:...... : .:. .....0.;..:... :::.:...; : :003'0:S3W..98O •' 333 3333 �... ..... .. . 3333 .. . .. 3333 ..:. 3330. . : : ...: : ..:....: ': f:.•...'.: ... . . ... 81k c k.r99aad7an'kaproyenwMs:GattyAt5titNSF';•:'ee!;'.:..:.::;33 . .:".•:-:':: ....... ..: .:...';:'.'Y..:. ::::...... . 3033. ...:.'.�: .. :.::'�:�' ... .:�:c.":":53..S00 53,804909 333. .. 3333. .. ........ . ....:�.:.4W 3'033�Ro::,:.:. ;:�,. :.. .. 3333 3333.. . .. . :.::330:,...:.':.:: .. . .. 3333 � . '3 2::'.::Bikt9:.: . ::.......:Erma:.,:;... :.::...::::::i,4i.la:'fans.Adgi;Uler17:P sVIa'n.7ta6hpin.3is(8(tbeE[,ua940; ::::.:::':..:..:.; :�'::>:,r'.;3' :7'.r::::':.: rt:::::::::::::,::::::''::': 3333 . .,..�.... ... .:. ..:..�.;..,: ....:...:: .:... ; . #�{ :.:.:..:, 3303 . :....:... .:....,..:.;3303.,., :..;..;.:::.::..:.:: ;'.::,. .. :. ,........:.:.,aoo• Mo .. ^ • 0003.. �....:i.. �.. : .�.. '.;0000;". ;00'00' � 53 ... . ..:. 303 2... .. .!very.:•:... ... ....:;.•:.:t ^ ...:. ... ... . .. • .. .: :...• .......... ..,. ::;'::3;003`:.;:.:..: i ..;Hari..::.:'::.r,':..o... ': .^80 3030.,: .. #3333 6P-04 . .... ....�PblCbdio5:...... ........: .. .:- 3,30;... .:. ,..:..::. :,:.. :..:.�.:,.. ��>'..,.:::::.'?'.:'.�,.:::::'.r.• 3033 ... 3030. . .. 0003. I�Uan4.4,orrW_mpPY RP4d.t6tAAR:.Tradtq to C<OR.a&G:A4elIv9Y:':•;'.:'.'.'.S5207W:';::".•! :":)':''•.i4t,I1:286d:;:`c:':i: :';;::.::.:.1:::::!4::44.2,99.0. .. ..• ... .... .....:. :':.':::.::;:..:::'::.::.:.....:.,....tait'.'.�.;..3303. .:........:. Ic• to.:, 000 ..... . .. ..3033... 3333.:•..:.....:..:.�.:�: •'..4..'r:':9P, •;::::':.::,:.•..:.:FdtGplllas:3,030.! 8(YGtanaa:on.Warte.0060,.Rwd4[INR.RY ''' •'o Stare. ...:.:y::':S:':r:`':':? : •... .. 3333.. .. . .. ... . . ... . ....... . . .. : 3333�...... . . ..:...:::�.�.. ...:'.....::375::�ci9�.�tiu�:�::::: :�:3?,:`.32.,.1005:::::::� ::'�:�:;:�.�::�'i�792,LFi9.. 333 . ................ .:...... . .4. •.... :. ' . :1.:::.:................. . 3333. :•0333.. 33 ...0333':'.::.::'.:"'0033: .:. ..; . ...:........ ........:..........:.'.�......^::. ^ :::• �::... .art,... .n55:::;<:_. .H[iNbAesolt:Tvagi:COiD5),:,° -.H:1.to!#oudr@. ...:t;-...c.'.:':..:''::.:::':. ..5.a,MlG..:'...Y..q : '::`35,9.A0,;ODR.:::':::... ..0.tl0.:.5:::::':'.I:..!.... 3 333. •... ........ .. .. -.::"- .. . ..:� :::...... .. 333 ... . .. 3333 . . .. • 0333 ₹hazNscnijEdt:to.SNYEiiaaF 44itleti�l6fHika:fangs':��.:':�'',','::�::;' '.rS;''.::,:528:8;000'::.:-.k .•:•:.....:...:::$6,230.0,j3 ':�'::::';:.?:y::'::r:'::::g:::'fg.:....:::3333.. .. 3333.. .... ..:.. .. ....:...:.. .. . 3033..3333. . :. .. 3333. 3333 . .. � �.... ..:..::.::: 333 :•�:•:::..:.� :...:.........: ':'.: .' ':dP..:ZA::.':;:::::.r::.::.,::.faMR1LnU::.`. "::: : ?:.:.:'.� • ... .:..... .. 3333:.- ........:.:: • 3333 . . ....:.... •...........:...' . ......... 3333... 3000�... 3333 ............'.. :�.::.?.:............::.. ..:... :..S57x0 tl11Cl: . .: . 40300.::..1...... .. .. . .; . . ..:.:.... . .^..:....: .:......:....:.. .. . .... ..: :.::.: .�..:. . .. :: :.:•••• ..±....: :: 5 dEOPP Hii3>:Fart GalBas::;::::::.::.(:;E3ke1�e5'wt3aR Nill£taadtLaPaHN.Io:fE�e.t?oartkrRhec;;:.�::::.;;:::;;.:::::;::' 3333:. 3333 ..... ......: . ... .:........�...... .: :.. .... .. ... . . :.) .....;S8R,1?Wt.::.::::Na'0 ^ 3330:.... ....:.. . . .....:..:. OF-BO ..... 333 3. .:.ke&P54 3333. .. ... .....:.:...:.. 0003•e::.:.'.BRaB: �. ..'�. ....:' . :.�:': ••.2... ......... ..0003•�.3333.�:::� :..: .. .... :.::.030'0'.^0•••••:•:‘,. C4lAns::�:.: :�:�::::'E3ke;&Pa0'Gnpmgemataa WurKE31re41::. :�:::�:..::�::...::�...,:.3300::.::: 3333..>;1:i: ..........:. ....::......:.: 3 . . _3333 ..3033 3330 3030 • 3330. 5 3333 .. 3033..... :::.;... ............ .... . . ....:3333 T4aG80: : to,,:-:-:. •. .. .. •••i.... .::::•::0;0.. ..: . ..ci:1IffP...:.:;.::.':... -::..,..... ... .. . �� : ::� };Q39t�::::::: ::0333::: � 3333. . ..�....�': .. .... � ' .•:.."....:•...�'�" ... :.. 3033. 0300^0303.•3303. 0333030. ...: :.. . . ., 3;333333 . '.:..... .. .. .. tsnmeTGcxlgtY�Rund'ltC' tcLa�ek;.:�.�.'.';�::'.': ' rGiSSti� ?0003'. ??'38:855Qu .... ..•:. ... 333.. . .. ::';'H-IS.•T':'tsratrrtoriri6l;.:':. ;1::4anmis•Gao' ...:>:::..:: .. ::,:�:i o x.::.4050.: •'"3'33'3:.:.:'. . • ....... .. 3303 .:.: 303. .fin.;: ::..., �: :No:::;;`:ii r�SE.i9g:909:7:.'s'::,T � : 'a5S 92..`.'. ':.�. 1S9:140� Potf.CP01m.';,.: :.._....::......:, 30....3i ...:'�. .. . .... .. �'�: 3000. 829 M . 3333.. .. .$Relgnpb vRY(NGk:Bwd�f�riMlMerliiW�R,'nep, '{Bft hE;p7''"�.:'::•::�:':'�:::.:':�7:.$25:.411(1....:.:.kdb':...�:.:; . 3333 3333. 3333 ..•••••/.•. .. .:.....:.��.:. . .. 3;303 3300:.. ... � 3333. .. ... . ..!440: ::: °4fr,.:33.::. .. ..: 3 •:. ... ... �:..^::.:.:.......•3333:.:0300 :. .. ..•14:..:.ER22'...:::.:::.::::^..: `•-.7!.1::...:: ove!ad;":':..::.'::'�:'�.:84i Sri's!5lks Lan ;.':':::'a:: :::::.:.::::•::::::::..:.::. .0'003: ':.::' .: .:;';.as•:::00'.:.':::.:. 303. ......:.:.: :. 333. ... ...: .: 3 3 33 ...:... :: .:.:. .. . �,....:.:..:. :.:.::....:.. •3333 ...•.,.. 3333 . . . . 3303.: ... . .:........: .:. .. 3033..: ... 3303.. .. . 3330 0303.:�.: ... .3333... 3333... 3330 .,.� .. ... ..;: . 303... ... 3 ��. ... :....: : :..'/' :�.:�..: :.::��:::::.':.:. .: 03'03.....:....::.... ............ ...: 3333 . ..... .� 3300.. ::.::�.'��;':: . .BE+b}:.: .:;:;:.:.:is i.: P..7!.1110.S�:::: i:.' ci kei.i !'SLaarb5.01is9MaeMfm)GngnY.i.t;4 tet!.::':'.:: .•:::.;.i 38: ' 3333.: :• ••••:..••••••-, 333 ...:•:•4;:! . . ... �, � .. ��.:...:..3030. ........... :.: ...:. 303 . .. 333 . . 3333 3333 ....:... ...'.::.:...::.� :3333 ..... . � .,.. ... ... 33 3 3.. ... .lies . .::.;'.'..51k&p........:.0100. . . .. 33 33. ..• . . ... ......::' '. ... . .... 333::.'"•:".-.;•:.......:::"•::::::'....... . . . 0333.:. .. . . . ... 330:: 3033. . ...:..... .:....fla0...303:�ND 300`0::"�:':.'3111.LgOXt01i'::'.:y.:s.�'.:.::.:::::."::'r::39,;E5tlA00 3030: : . .:. .., .......:......, ';. E:..;BP?AB�.::;::'."::'. ..r1i'Fat.Cnllltis.:::i'.:::;�:::�:BiMq'Pptl:P�'afat�9'fG.NMalde!�tiRtYospea.b.M9bet.N.::�:::; :.!;..!'''i::S250R00'...'::(ia0 �':�:'!1#jA.8.50:E00 f.:.:.:;:�:'::�:;<:'"::`at4tE0A0O It 3030. '.' "•• . 3300.. ::' :...:.:..:.:...:: ,:.:a...<.:...c;�;::•.'. :....::: :•.,•::':::. 3333 3333%. .. '"•:"8 :'::.:. .tit4at?Y.. ...: :.:..:: are Wta:tAktr:Ner:.::::.::::;:'..'':: : :_:.;;::.::'.: .:.:::4j-;::.':'. f. :"::::::::::'''e':0'030:: :;: tt ..M . ....: . .:... . . ... .... .:.. ..: . :. ,,:�::::.......Pe.:::.....�:.:�;'.�...: ..::.:._,.�;. ::.:.. .: 3330:r^::�';:':.:': ��:�:rs�:f.ao�}:::':Nu:;:>.�: �SigB1;D90''r':':'t.�•�:::::�:..: ::Siii,2>^h �:: 0333. htai;w+saee:Contedt,:adse3:Peel ...0033..: ......::.•••••.:: 0'$1::00 f: '.No !: ..::........f..:::-..,..•:.:1:::i::::.:::::,:.:.••t4 33 .<:...':!;.3330...!3303 - . . .Imrsaveme?gb Mattmaya°.:.; .. .: :��:::� ��:.:0300 �::.::::':�::Fort:t;9dln3: . . .::...;3000�:........::... .. ...... .:..:....:.:... :..:: .. ::.�:.:.::>.:.:.:... t .' :;';:..::.: ::''.:. 9assA:Grcak.. � .53.SaR,LBR:::::.Mn:::�;.'::::S;$ffi4_d¢? :.>.�;:':::.'; .�::SaAx7�ila0 ^ 3333. �. ... .. •.. .......... ..'...: ..:..>�.:033'3.3333 ........333 . .: 33 33:. .. . .. .. ,..::' :..'. ....; Ht4l.:....x.45 �....a$GT.. .. �: .� ..:..:.....<... ... 3333. .. 3333.. :..:: ...... 3030:�:. 3333... .:......... .� ..: . .....::.�.::'.�.� ... :::::.:....... :...:0330 3333. :.'Js.. �:'9A-82:.: :.:.'::::::�3000 tar(mer'.CrbumY�::' ��:3t2d'&Htaaruerdla2AgA�a<.Phase7;;PeGesMbaSly¢tPzsz:.`0330: F,P44:�:�'$.,g$tAQAti�::��:'r;' :'.:: : 3333 . .. .,. .. ... . . . ... 3333 ..20':::: OPg7'.: ::::. ::.:':: CsrMer. :'00'3 .:; 0000;,l'182$T::..:.:.... .:.:..ydet . ':......: ::'::; ::.... .:.... 3 30 3. : . .:. . ... ,:...;��. : : : .. .. ....... 3333. . . ,.; Ca�Y.....:.......::...:Ns9amknPbiaYatr�Llles•SW�fi6.tukGR:fit::'.`:.'.:� ;.::::p�... :�:i:S408 . ... ... ::::6'-e;":.• ....:::.: . .. '�':..:�....:....: ....:..: . .' ::�........:,996 ...3033;0033: ..3333.. : ..,. ... .. ... ...'... :4:::::: . .. . .... :.'.........;.:::::•:^Lad<..:....:.:.... EP-9:... .. :��lw+�... to c .' .�.� �;...::.. ......... .�: ... �::. .......::....... ,. .. 033. 3003:. "': �...'kr?0333 .��...�". :::.;:;'':: :;'. .. 333.333. : : . rone.:Cak?tY:.:.::;.;,'Lay'nN@!Cwnt%rfaatl.p8lkcytletaaeit:'..?S.1G5H.:.::.::...:.::::::::::': 3 303. .. 0303 ...,, . 0000.:. .;.......:.:.....:..::.. :,:.,.:::..w-.-.:.:..:::..:...,.:....:..... . ...:.....�. 3333.. 3333 ,�, . .. :3i;zx3, ^ ��9W ;:::`N0':'Sr: >:3.�294,BOA��:�::!`:�::� .`i :;S348J;1D0 .1:22':::: .:: :. :::...�::::::.. ...:.:.... .,.: :..:...::':,;q .. .o: 01;03 . . BP-na:.,; .••••:•:• ; 3303 . . ..::.:..::::.:.::.:::: :: .... ' :::'�:..: 33 3 : ..:.. ...:i.r.:::::::•;.r.:. .:.:Pi,ia5:'9,?:: 61kfAa.......dQD?TaE'...:.sing::-., .RAveriSd,4Fcntr,rreY.:";isi1:.:.-.02zi...•:::?:: sE:S.:::i]78.739,Ui1B::Y8ii5a.-::.2::-..•. ..0*�.. .....:...:..:........ ....,3303..<....:.: ...:...... .:.�:...:.. . .....:3300.:. . .....::.:.: .3333.. ..:.:.:... ... 3333.. .030) : .. 0333.. 3333 .. ... 3333....3333 .. . ..:...�:^ .::.��..::::.. . .: .. 3330 ....:.......:. .•:,.::::.: '...:�;::0000::: 8i,:'. .".betiiS0S?gWG.:..dt SPn...77.Aveat.eC ...r.to ::. : ::.f::'::.:. „..::-.:r::33,03:,0,.,,,,, ... . ::.,.:...::' ''.:0.:. :.2S::;' BP:78:.::":':::�:.!:f��:,'Ka4Gndinx..;:...;��.::; kUR!W :. ......... :...R4.:.:...8�wnaY .:.. ..{ wuk 3303: ;:.�.:• 3. :� :.. : 3333 .. :...:.. :.. .. ............. ....:..::::..,.:. ,.:. :,:..:.^: Ctsr .ittah:;,:,::!.:!.::::::.:::'�. .:;.:::.�::;:::':>:..:.:..;�:.:...:.'."$:5:::'d::,�St1itAE0: ::::Na,::.:...;:3,�73D,Q0A : �€::;::.:.::�:;Sis.:245A90 2aY 3 333.. ... :..:,::....::.........�.. .. . ..........:,..::,:.::.� ....:..: : tt Or;.:::..,:rc,t:::..:. ave:.:.:: 333 3. 3:::•.::::::::::... .. • 6pa7 •:..:<':;r;:.••:�:;::..FnitcapiNs..:::.:::i: ': iii4at,: i.t:Ornke Hoiventwsteae .'::. :::::�:.:.::.;-.:::: -.:::: ,_:'....-.eel:•:.:r:::::::[:03;3 ;:,.:...:. ..: 3330, :.::.:: ..:..:.. . ^ ... .. .. .... ..... .... .. .......:....::..3033 : • ....:.....::.:.::.:: :....:# ......':.� 0330�3333.;.,.. .:�:..7500�t3AQ::::'�:No�::�::::i?;,22590:::::::.;:;'. :��:��::::S,t`6:Tey�(Stj(t �: 3303:..�.:...:......:.. . ......... . 3333 3333.: 3333 3333 . . C:... .........:..: 0300. :. :......::....: ...:.... ...... ......... ... . 3 333 ' . ....:;:::.:.:y::.:. .:.:.:...*525,000':::N ,3033 0 11 64,000 . :. %.._£:Lu�ttesAForfEedktstnteRorke ....;�... . 3330... 3333.. . . .. y� .:. .. :. 3333 • ... .. . .:........ ..... ..:.... .:..... 3333. ...�:.. .....:.'..::;'F,^`:..:.:...... :.'.. '3303.. .... ... 3303... .. . 3333... .:................:... ... ....... .. .. ...::....:'''825. . ......... 3333 .. . 3333 3333 .: ....;'.:.::'..:... .. ' 003'0:: ':;0033: 3333.. ..�.3033. .. .....: .�.. ... :..}3333 ::23.:"s�:8P9.;�:::�.::'.�::..:.:.Ww4n:Ga . 303;.::.� .... ..........;';::.:^: .: :':00;0:',0;30'0:.:..':.:... .:: .. 3333• 3333..3033.3333... ... . .. ...:..;.�X>:':`:.;; LahmN'_�plu!y'Re? A0.81U.'.dz3dA :i:?:'000(.;:::;SEM1481#88R 3 3 03 ..........�:... .....' ':cock' 333 ..,. i.'::.:..::.: :.::.:;"......c.:....... .....:::::.;::c:.::: :::.:. .. ..3333.............:.:. ... .: .. :..:..,;:;...;.`:::: : 27::: . wx : ... ..t : . � : ' ... �........ .... .......:.::..:';>...!....::::"1�:::...: .:. :.:. .. 3333:.. : :.:::... :.. 3033 333. Pa0dipRlyxrTtai SkAlFUseFelh.':: .5!;:.:.::�:•::::'��::�.:.;; ::573:d00„0:_:a:Ne: er:: '::S}9.8➢ 609. ':''i:3:: 3333.. . .. ........:..3330.. . �...' � :::................ 3333 .;. . . .. 3330: 3333....... ... ... 3333 .. ....3033.. . .. ....•..3333... 3333... 3303. .. z4':"''Ea-ss::.:':. 0'000: 0003 :..:..:.::: :..;..::::.::.:..;.: .. ...6rebg:rf:'':;i:::`1 ":i:iiiipii:Rootig.Bg'P.artis32rttl.:.: E1u42tB;riye0uty::;:::.:.:- 40:.: e.W 5::��...Ss9. $84A'',..�::' :•:..: :-:.•' r'.;.:: i..;l :. . 3333. ...� .. . �: .. _... .: •....:�......:... . ... 333... ... , ..... . ..... . ..3300 .::�.:�.:��:..:..: ..�.:.. ;3030 � 3333... .: .:.. ... ..............: :::..:::.:;:..:'...:::.:::':::;::'.>je:1101054 poll.:.::u5treet1e::':Str <.:.::.::. ...:. ..: .....::.. 3000:0333...:...:..:�: ... . •:.28:. ::Bo.D: 300;03 . . :'0'303':!'::'i'q.:x3M:71yeJ+la. 3303 .:... 3333. , :...b.1krR4E.. .: 3333 0333... .. ...........0..5.8E GQ,4:::'.!tds�':#y':�:Si.9,�5bt3,d0D;:�.� .:y:535 eye aft0 3330 .... ....... ...�.:� Y..:. ,0333 . aPalh illl:Sheet l4''.G'I'SEtest.;'::'.`'i:":::,::.:: �s:.;. 3333... Graatey+.::�:..�::. '.:::..::.4k+.C.i:OAufmad:51,€P 60x3^:: 6303.:.... .,..:..�•:.•�r..': .::0;6 .100:0.^.::.;.:'�:c .... :.:;',:..:03;..::.::.::.r::.............................................................. :; : ..;.:' ^30 0 0. .. ::.:C: .�. . . ...:...::........ ..3333:.. rva. 333.:. .: ....�r:;.':.0303.3003..3333�::E:0�6.94 �':079"::.�r.:320,S0E,900�:�:::�:.y::::!::;;;:: :.: ^ .::::.:.:: . .: .. .... 3333.... 333 .. .. .::::::. '��:::•�� :;.:.............:.::...:•�;��:::.:��.::� .. . •... 330. ... .. ::..:,..:�'. z:n;:::.... ..t.. .. :,.. .0336.-::•:..:..:: 061;;:•;H106.3:.;.. ..: :. ..� 3330. .: .:: :. . : 3333. :.........;:0333 �::.::�^'::' :': Fotf.00llipit:'.`p:?. :. kelmeepk. ... '..:�:^:.::... .. .. ...... :..... ...: .. :.:.�...�::. .: .....�!.....::..,.:...h?zibatyPa?gac:b?a5vk:Istde5.'=::.:!.:::::?.:;':!..i.:''.'[.r:.::�: .. . .:�::.:.�.... .. �1�S0O � .. ., ....:.. .:.:r...,..:...:.: .7:'�°!€�:S r;::327�10;Q99:r;75�,�0'�fl0ip::y:.:`i�'ic:;..:::.(!., .SI ..;..:...::t•-:::::::•::••••:::•;; :.. .... ... .brill.:3633;:.:h. :!..:'n S.tI ::::;:.::�'.::.::::..:......•6143.:... ,.:::::. ..:.,.: .; •. . 3333. 3333... :::-4::lc:�:E[?HD��'!0000^00'00'0'x00:E:6tiGc4iiis' :::'::'.�::Bikdlaaa4 oa luertae£tDdarafZfaa'::':�030'0.;.:.:::::...� 3333:;::.`:':,.:.:. ..: ...;..:.:. ;::.::�........<..•:: .. . . ... :......:.:.: . .:........ ...:.. . . 330.3330•. Y.t9:.. 3030../.::::.:::.;:::::,.... 1 .:::..� ::�:':::::::::43,.Jd0,A,..ab':.�.H4� ': ''i 339.F08,aE10 ;;:S::, �:; :_.:..Ti26:S5.H.Agt1 ::::..... :. 3 03 . . .. . ' 5' 8P42' :'.::'R83≥::'. FortCotiris��r:.: :::.:!hot:::::: :. .:.:.:::.::::.�< 4tad::.:;3303.':^0030 :::::' :.:.�t ':. :..:.:.:.:.:0 ..;.; r:':.:.::.:.::.:..:..�'t.:.::..;': �.•..:3'30'. .. 333... ..... :.::33. 6 . .:..:.....:c::..:.:. T�mumiki.,E tlatpass{otad1c1WP.tl5:::'r'.>�;;';.::`3 33.. ;,.:.::... ..3 33 3. o;-• .. ... .. .. .:..::.::.,... 3333... 3303. ,, .. ..:::::'::;:.:. (<:; .332. :.. •...;:::.:.: 0030.;.' 3333..:: .':..::. .:.....::;..; .:::.:...3300 �:.;.::..:.�:.:.�::: �:::..;.....:.. . . �- :BP3R�: .;':.:�.':':'�':;:'FaYCo4m5.;..;<:;.:.. :HHMames.ta�'WeHand'Kmil:NdrtEdiiabeUf w:3.CR:{4E':..::::;003;3':; ....::......:';�:;.:. . .......:. . . . .. .. ...:....::i?SG:•9l16_.:::::Hn�:.:: :333.139:D00....:::::'::��:',:.:c.. :�:�S7,dOBStDO r t r • 2025 Regional Transportation Plan TABLE V-1 I'm. BIKEIPEDESTRIAN PROJECTS Additional .... Rank Prgeete Submitting On State CumulativeOn-System Off-System y Agency Project Cost Est. System? Cost Cumulative Cumulative Cost Cost 35 BE-I MLarpnatCaunE� Big Ttwnl/rONerTmiF S1,75600(t NO $20.696000 328;$0B.0QS3 35 f}1`14µ:: tarmeri!".mm Fast Padre lover Troll ... . S2,2Cp,00R NO � 5371B600p $91808,L0S' 35 BA-15 Lartinerco : Ladraef CNunty Road3I3 Ittleidl3C BkyGekanes SH 80 $5WA0C l40 'S3TB38 D4'q $3 ;305UQ¢ ii:37 W-$B E.aiamrtaunty Wast Pwld'e aver Trail - .54500,000 No S3415B000 $33;,808,00(; 39 BP-29 Smart Trips Region-wide Railroad Right-of-Way Intercity Bicycle Path $9,504,000 No $48,660,000 $43,310,000 39 BP-60 Greeley Loveland/Greeley Irriga0on Ditch bike/ped path 3480,000 No $49,140,000 343,790,000 41 BP-31 Greeley Greeley/Loveland Canal Bike/Ped Underpasses under US 34 $1,750,000 No $50,890,000 $45,540,000 Bypass P% 42 BP-5 H-3 Ladner County Lanier County Road 19 Bicycle Lanes-Loveland to Fort Collins $1,500,000 No $52,390,000 $47,040,000 43 BP-10 Lorimer County Ladner County Road 5 Bicycle Lanes $750,000 No 353,146000 $47,790,000 43 BP-26 Loveland School Sidewalk Gap Improvements $175,000 No $53,315,000 $47,965.000 43 BP-6 H-4 Larimer County Lorimer County Road 32 Bicycle Lanes 5750.000 No 554,065,000 $48.715,000 — 46 BP-13 Ladner County I-25/Poudre River Bicycle/Pedestrian Trail Crossing $500,000 No 554,565,000 $49,215,000 47 BP-58 Greeley Sheep Draw Multi-Use Trail $686,000 No 355,251,000 $49,901,000 P.. 48 BP-14 Ladmer County Ladner County Roads 12 and 904 Bicycle Lanes-SH 60 to Loveland 31,000,000 No $56,251,000 $50,901,000 48 BP-49 Fort Collins Bikelanes on Mountain from Riverside to Meldmm 3125,000 No 356,376,000 351,026,000 50 BP-59 Greeley 35th Avenue/WCR 35 Bike Lane $3,000,000 No $59,376,000 354,026600 rm. 51 BP-12 H-1 Lorimer County I-25 Frontage Road Bicycle Lanes $1,250,000 No $60.826,000 $55,276,000 51 BP-47 Fort Collins Bike/ped-West Central Neighborhood 32,500,000 No $63,126,000 $57,776,000 51 BP48 Fort Collins Eastside Neighborhood-Bike 8 Ped Improvements $4,000,000 No $67,126,000 $61,776,000 ■. 54 BP-33 Greeley 22nd Street Bike Path,7th Avenue to 1st Avenue $130,000 No $67,256,000 $61,906,000 - 55 BP-28 Loveland Madison a recreation trail underpass(Phase 2) $500,000 No $67,756,000 $62,406,000 56 BP-20 Evans Evans Town Ditch Bike/Pedestrian Trail from 49th Avenue to the $750,000 No $68,506,000 $63,156,000 Little Thompson River r.. 57 BP-21 Loveland Loveland Bike Route Signing and Striping $170,000 No $68,676,000 $83,326,000 57 BP-27 Loveland Madison Avenue©recreation trail crossing pedestrian-actuated $35 000 No $68,711,000 flasher(Phase 1) $63,361,000 59 BP-43 H-100 Fort Collins Bikelanes on Prospect Road(Shields to Timberline) $9,000,000 No $77,711,000 $72,361,000 w Project costs also included with Highway or Rail category -$11,400,000 UNCOMMITTED PROJECT TOTAL a%6,311,000 $5,350,000 $60,%1,%0 BIKEIPEDESTRIAN GRAND TOTAL — $67,965,000 $6,382,000 $61,583,000 =Projects Corrmitted in TIP .,, =Fiscally Constrained Projects ..e........,.......:::0S:.......o..,....>:*:* r 7 r P r I 3033 Regional Transportation Plan TABLE V-2 f^ HIGHWAY PROJECTS 1 On Additional OrnSystem Off-System Rank Project$ Category Suhml5b0 Agency Project Cost En State Cumulative Cwt Cumulative Cost Cumulative Coat r.. System? System? lak . '•, . COOT:• . 1)34&n fneis klanhp<SM 25li6 VOA nuue. • $3a,ZOg0t*•:Yes .S2SIBS,Rg0':' :$f,35g00e_': TIP • ' GY16Y .• Lit 2671Yt0Mkv,?$N t&L.Abd.5nMass 51D,33 . Yea 5000' : .•54!,6X#,000 1 56,626000:• :`. .: W.. YTr '. :COOT: : : .. ..US3#lYb6rti�p;,k)ktrin:ivi4rie t0.UmraeAWita! :}2,4#3,000 :.Yes • J4T,20?,P00. ": S3X36ynp0..: .. . '''''• "cool' la2#7,4ati1}WOtiedi0n.and> biltf,Chem! ' ' " s '"' • •3A20.0s 1lt :iSO4Qs6:a3d''. MO.#s4110t," .. Cmatipaf:fsl Sdaetri lsrotend •TIP COOT . 3H402:iw0si* as¢b 1oS25::'•:'• ' 530544000 :Tat •'• .,SS1.012:000::: ::'$81N43.640::,',...:'::'.'::.•.... 71P:. . ' cool' • VSw Tor,4eeda in.btset7minptwtr7*ata 5206000:.'Yps ,_,jbt.lil6i00a'i .:ir9Y74B00:::..:::... ..:. TIP . : coot .. SFJY#YF25mtt00a00e D+tm;SITIOPts F6aJea I bid 11 i 52,354.3Nb ' 1}t. 2SQa.53a,Cti0 " 533.324.000' ;* .. .:.•• •TYP ' tt,moui . ' • :i foandeeeatat SHa6tIa(J•1nek4,BiTpW. :$2ar000'. Yes :..$33lYl,WO..'•:',i33:t7P,00R:.'.:'. net TIP twtiarCDMII. •mkisg44o ifopro+!/nMiF l,>ln?ar{`.p44()''!ra424( . .: _•. . . : ..: • • . r ' ta,•00;t,1b atta szi3.aoa '.Ye:"': .sa4.451.wb'' 3aizes21i0fi :. : SPIaJY0n014nmaNRontattlNrrro✓nMRoea Dal HP 1 t.mek� aW _ • fa3,000: '.ro5bfi205,ro4. .. 'fi3l.oD0 TIP TOTAL $14,205,000 514,052,000 $153,000 ^ 1 .•kt'#$' ; 40 t% 3 '-• • Poa5WIGISI3s9kieapansIAatn* s10A,,,, 'Yes.: :';$000:090 -Sttj000p •" I • • ' LovSrtd .„.'• 2sl �•Lirlatd' 501MiMMOSSOIS' H a p.$nt i,mart b $20 ,,n`,.*$ 1004,G09 : " " .Fe0.090: .Y .:'.'. '_:':. s• 04405 Ls** . L 53IS26r6.**I nRecoadre7la • $6,1404":: :Yea $*900Jl6o :;:'ri,+,EAeR6UG '_• $ : -`H•50. • 4#RMPC: • ' ' S70*I Peas>44 outta:Ails Sen Wide' 51,350 ' $o ' ' .5461$6,009 :;,...:..:'.'.::,' :17260.00, s MFS: Pan Cases ' . 3dtenottR0.Yni0G 49H 9ifiset* a*ww0t$ktt .0,43,x,:,, :Y*$ *44,'.':,':, .':'..7nS'/.33C,d.DO ..... t4ds. OCCT 3@3EUS54?1*ASun5rtt mdadtY 5#TAtlq,,,. Yek .,. '$Gt,5Alt,<< .V4,3%UO:.;:fIr... ':'.' .: 00m. 3LL4 Cir. 1 COM. . 62S,I 11F3nbr&stOSMaaJn rwee.ras- Pblse5 5$471:0:00.3".. 13,000.000 Yee .: $1C'h460,005 : 5At'Js6000:. . #0.x5 unworn,* . . femwaougos td'1 raifii*polukaid0*. . . ••getfnetio fdtpiW5d• . . $5,#31,"14: Ns. • $7f5,591,6A5 • S{S,tF'".. ₹40. Wm.t'4NQy ' in,. 0.6!14900 ii0'tF eclitSJMa5 Ave? : , st .. � itq.3wiindto Pan Cnmt �3.'. S? ASJ.4U:6 "Amoco. ^ n-a tlefuer Cou07s. : t,44x741,t1pkerkta OWW..IIIITSI2Hwadk• • ' *t;7Up,:,,. C133,5d1„, Ppat7i3" . #46C ' Cis** $43:* Wvia4:25iG:krM0tgitELVO473usi0e$4 ' s2A0q,;:', yp..'...S#RV,35I04R.'.;Sidf.'AJ4Otl4 H5➢ t***........." VSF47P>uBd0A4*49.-FgO+'4#aehsP'71atSWef $3.202.,+n YWa $37,T53.OW :-;SJi3,39t1.,.000 .-. *444 t1FR MP 'Y4'a�enktt?:,kena3euatot7Paet' �. :':: 57Att76100f7 ' ,:".::`';': . Nb0FColI 1.122n1)Aeaest Iji, Wiv PH& ` : Y4F3 . Po6CWe* � ... . . $F0.T07„': $J6hS00�pW: .�75Ci1e60$0 . '': ...::;. . ItrpldraenWian' #3`#0 Ldtntei Give:. i25a Hh{inlerttar $spa3m0,g aetS#• Caine t ... $ ' ' �.:. : .. .. . 55,39110!" .. $7dT.200.O0R��: #IAt',GIt90p :�:�:'. .` .. U9568ypi4sn5d4hSlted#denaeptldR. • .. .... . . .:.,., 70:234 6laeieg ...bpraNdedk:'.. 5e6t,5'14 $757GA,v,. ' tia5a"o4o .. k7A • 2 SOOT' . . • . 0224-BisHiSt SS$It itctianye(Oreays e464) 526A0q;,, .Yes 645&000% :.',i*siSAtl0. H•a3 Lov,tara • • tfl5T,CObwifo • • ... i.:: • 1•Whvay4T5F:.. : • • 5xg4„:� Kei � ':.SsftisAOn.wC'...aSiYG,?aR,?uu: _',:: ..�..:.. 04274 Gttelty • • :; .:•V$24A5$ei5 l$HilPwm lutsr041anoe It* : •• " ' •ta-idada* '. . . . VA:We :. Yea ".:s420,5U0sOq E530fr,2°.d§,li :.:.?'::.:. MuIWly(. km. Acn:,.. .oa0.,• .Fan .. . . t4T} PW•afp$FtF. ...t+55imaal0m. . .... ,. .536.'16ff,•i.�._;Yet:. .52t8,54",t0U0 :::s,,4RS,i",'0G7. :,F..�.,';:.;' #i•Fa PanCL5ba. SOOdttiRliaLeded4lis"ttaigWriIent AMR ... ' : .. . lti4?letn4dalion . $320.95x,,On '.(_: ??•:. . .. ;TAM.' .",YWe`' $255,1..„' ' i. tt x#. Egr7t • ...,ith Aiaa:e'�42'td732m}Street 7tmra00 .:.' ...''. . .... .. .. • , ' 5440,,i e. NR .." $Y4$.506.06R:�.':i�:��t'.':i.; :i::526,03L.Otl' .74,33L. OreeMt • ::"..L '24Dtws22idln,bnus i2. th Avantlkdoss, • .... � �.;, ''YM : '.'5253.3,t5,00d`.•r#+'437i7ii 000 E '.; ?.:. .:.:.: t4Fft WOt;' " „'t-23'aarF535Y2 tnarobnIA. Minna%or). ' • $25,000•:, y t: : -_5352Zt5.000..,::4255:204140 . .. uS55; � ..and S5ASrtid irfitfRCitOit .. .. . on, }4233 t429t" n *y `.• .: : V$BS₹1,npaelf*10. )014 aN3"3,010t�'... ••— . .. .. $456.,aft astit $25;1,4 . , f °?::**2.** . 1420#. Gmalah, :. Ss a Hide tety4fakY045:t5W 661det6karVP, • . .$606",':...t*:: '.`.w'3_,T2ao00 $35:33$,0_:: .. 045 ' fa0Y7flt O*A* .. : Wn+!Wr"tlawh aad3tpwereCOrnp7gWa6 rx . . '. , .. . S. '�2A56'L. ,:. : `5251,356,05?::' r::i;'.:`: ' ..• :'x' 432#, . N332 ''''.4?:' v. its lig K*SSaAOsoutioattnteft i ti. ' . [ . ... • $40 • eil." : . . 6 .$201: :�$25'X04..f05E:. 50. k44I : • v..•., 00.1.1 3Disaaa7iRAv6*. .. 42s,(0“4,1: ter:'" ::59[4 .. 3h :44451.:' .: . .. • n. s ` :(. :..: n51RT�b:af ldh**•. .. 53. #441:.: : : COOT. "t. : .: $FOG ,r.;...Yr '. •x€41 50000 .. ' . �.. � ".r.' ?}TT7:SSY 060` ;' ;:;�•.`';";` fJ555Bip»i in Rh SheaO : $200.'5'' _ 'Yet : ::.55424045.005.:'_52T5,044;.;"e • . '. ..,:•1%3s'SHhdkferthanc.MR 3mdroxamsraa Pam* . 03: -.x44,'. _tarpiereArty . . . ; :'":.:.: E: :: :. • .. . 50,0101;, '.* _ i0;7•,146.1,00 j ' G¢YV0:::.. -.7.,,,. ' i.e. 34: 141du BR33 'Fontaine' •• Priia AY{cipsni9$at e01stttectq . : ': :'$13,3wiG�r':':ilc*'' :'$32Ii.305i000 x:::.' ?;::.:1•2;.i:‘f'` '•ji Sif"", 5t": #•f$ `Ia*iwO*i:• .. : �' 14P1.11 rcR Analtnp°414rned>:_. fink :'.I., . . . ... � �. , .. : �:. :.. ... $2106:, ".'.Yei�[.. ":,$24955,:: "[:�iSA3a1i4U0il:. . "':,[::. . n i a 2025 Regional Transportation Plan TABLE V-2 P's HIGHWAY PROJECTS On On-System Off-SystemRank Pro)ecta Category System? Submitting Agency protract Coat Eat State Cumulative Cost Cumulative Cost Cumulative Cost System? .... 24 ...:$444 COOT (M4a68ipasa a1321Md$f t& SEO0)0 YSa $92845.000 $26t,�M$4 a7' ;F4*Z6 Fjr46 ' 48.yim$Eanktillm Yervoisi7l8Y6mWn4K stAopttl04 t44 F3aG14B Q0 fl8 ' mio. :: 37 H-30 COOT 4258 SH 402 Interchange(Loveland) $30,000,000 Yes $360,185000 $312,864,000 wee 39 11-202 Greeley 5600,000 n Rlde Lot®HWY 34 8 Two Rivers PKWY 5600,000 No' 5380.785,000 $47,921,000 Interoharge 40 11-70 Greeley US 34 Bypass and 83rd Avenue Interchange $20,000,000 Yes $360,785,000 $332,664,000 41 1436 CDOT SH 392:I-25 to Downtown Windsor 522,113000 Yes $402,898,000 $354,977,000 'owl 41 11-81 Font Collins Harmony Rd-Seneca St to BNSF RR,contdbution for 12,600,000 No $405,498,000 $50.521,000 From Range Community College frontage 41 11-92 Fort Collins Tmbaline Road Widening,from Drake Road to $15,460000 No $420,978,000 $66,001,000 Prospect Road 45 14200 Fort Collins SH 14 to US 287 Tmck Route Bypass $85,000,000 No" $505,978,000 5151001,000 own 45 1498 Fort Collins Taft Hill Road Improvements,HpaetooN to Old $13,860,000 No' 5519,838,000 $164,861,000 Harmony 47 11-99 Fort Collins Prospect Widening from the Poudre River to 1-25 515037,000 No' $535,875.000 $180,898000 48 11-79 Fon Collins Harmony Road Widening from Interstate 25 to College $57,760000 Yes $593,655,000 $412,757,000 sew 49 H3 BP-5 Latimer County Lorimer County Road iB(Wilson Ave/Taft HMI Rd) $12,000,000 No' $805,655,000 $192,698,000 Widening-Loveland to Fort Collins 49 14.82 Fort Collins Trilby Road-College Avenue intersection $1,260,000 Yes $606,915,000 $414,017,000 improvements 49 H-83 Fort Collins College Avenue-HarseteoN Road Intersection $2,700,000 Yes $609,615,000 $416,717,000 Improvements se. 49 H-84 Fort Collins LaPorte-College Intersection Improvements $1,260,000 Yes $610,875,000 $417,977,000 49 H-85 Fat Collins Laurel-College Intersection Improvements $1,260,000 Yes $612,135,000 $419,237,000 54 1437 CDOT SH 14 Structures at I-25(Fort Collins) $4,500,000 Yes $616,635,000 $423,737,000 ea55 14146 Fort Collins Lemay Street Widening from Lincoln to Mulberry $2,850,000 No $619,465,000 $195,748,000 56 H-207 Greeley 5th Street Widening $600,000 No $620,085,000 $196,348,000 56 1487 Fort Collins Lomeli Avenue North.Grade Separated Railroad $7,313,000 No 5627.398,000 $203,661,000 Crossing 58 11-7 Lorimer County Lifter County Road Wldenirg-LCR 26 $7,275,000 No $634,673,000 $210,938,000 (Crossroads Blvd)b SH 392 59 11-88 Fort CollinsLemayAvenue-Lincoln Avenue to Conifer Street 4- $18,436,000 No $653,111,000 $229,374,000 lane Medal with At-Grade Railroad Crossing 59 H-97 Fort Collins Downtown River Corridor Plan Implementation $12,000,000 No $665,111.000 $241,374,000 61 H-61 Loveland US 34AVilson Avenue Intersection Rebuild $800,000 Yes $665,911,000 $424,537,000 nu 61 11-62 Loveland US 287/57th Sheet(Larimer County Road 28) $800,000 Yes $666,711,000 $425,337,000 61 1-25 Evans 37thStreet/WCR 54 Widening from Highway 257 to $10,455,000 No $677,168,000 $251,829,000 23rd Avenue 64 1-4 BPS Latimer County Larimer County Road 32 Widening-US 287 to-25 $8,905,000 No* $686,071,000 $260,734,000 wea 64 11-74 Fort Collins None,College Avenue Widening from Jefferson to the $7,212,000 Yes $893,283,000 $432,549,000 Poudre River 64 11-48 CDOT US 65:Weld CR48 to WCR 70 $88,208,000 Yes $761,491,000 $520,757,000 67 14142 Fort Collins Overland Trail Widening from Sumac to Drake $7,554,000 No $789,045,000 $268,288,000 see 67 11-191 Fat Collins Overland Trail Widening from Mulberry to Elizabeth $4,920,000 No $793,965,000 $273,208,000 69 1146 Learner County Lorimer County Roads Widening-SH 392 to LCR 38 $7,275,000 No $801,240,000 $280,483,000 (Harmony Road) 70 1481 Fat Collins Prospect Read interchange at Interstate 25 $18,660,000 Yes 5619,900,000 5539417,000 71 1444 CDOT US 85 Bypass at 18th Street $200,000 Yes $820,100,000 $539,617,000 dm 71 H46 COOT US 85 Bypass at 5th Sheet $200,000 Yes $820,300,000 $539,817,000 73 11-88 Fat Collins Timberline Road NOM,Grade Separated Railroad 513,260,000 No $833,560,000 $293,743,000 Crossing at Vine dive 74 4455 Loveland Latimer County Road 5 Widening-LCR 20E to LCR 26 $6,900,000 No' $840,460,000 $300,643,000 iliws (Crossroads Blvd.) 75 H-117 Fat Collins LaPorte-College to Taft Hilt Widening $17280,000 No $657,740,000 $317,923,000 76 1423 Evans 35th Avenue Widening $800,000 No $858,340,000 $318,523,000 77 11-2 Loveland Larimer County Road 26(Crossroads Blvd.)Widening- $2,750,000 No' $861,090,000 $321273,000 625 to LCR3 r 78 14145 Fort Collins Shields Street Widening from Fossil Creek to Tdlby $10,260,000 No' $871,350,000 $331,533,000 79 11-139 Fort Coffins Horsateatl Road Widening from Shields Street to Taft 512880000 No $884,010,000 $344,193,000 HB Read 80 14113 Fat Collins Confer-Hickory Re-Alignment $2,130,000 No $886,140,000 $346,323,000 iles 61 H34 CDOT -25:Weld CR 38 to SH 14 $244,894,000 Yes $1,131,034,000 $784,711,000 81 11-21 Johnstown SH 60 Widening(I-25 to SH 257) $18,000,000 Yes $1,149,034,000 $802,711,000 81 11-224 Greeley Four Laning of SH 263 $9,250,000 Yes $1,158284,000 $811,981,000 cons 84 14125 Fort Collins Mulberry widening from Shields to Taft HMI 511,724,000 No' $1,170,005.000 $358,047,000 85 11-109 Fort Collins Prospect/Overland Trail Modem Roundabout $350,000 No $1,170,358,000 $358,397,000 ��sa s L lee 2025 Regional Transportation Plan 1► TABLE V-2 HIGHWAY PROJECTS On Additional on-System Off-SystemRank Project A Category Submitting Agency Project Coat Eat State Cumulative Cost Cumulative Cost Cumulative Cost System? Fur 85 H-211 Greeley Rivera Parkway Construction from SH 60 to WCR 525,000000 No' 51,195,358.000 $383,397,000 87 H-111 Fort Collins Shields/LaPorte Intersection Improvements 51.740.000 No $1,197,098,000 $385,137,000 87 H-132 Fort Collins Prospect Road Widening from Taft Hill to Overland $11285000 No 51.208,378,000 5396,117.000 Troll owe 87 H-138 Fan Collins Horsetooth Road widening from Taft Hill Road to $6,306,000 No $1,214,684.000 $402,723,000 Overland Trail 87 H-152 Fort Collins Timberline Road Widening from Willow Springs to $11,460,000 No $1,226,144,000 $414,183,000 Trilby 87 H-163 Fort Collins Overland Trail Widening from Horsetoot to CR 38E 56,240.000 No $1232,384,000 5420,123,000 rew 87 H-188 FM Coterie Overland Trail Widening Men Mulberry(CC)to LaPorte $6,042,000 No $1,238,426,000 5426,465,000 93 H-218 Greeley ROW for the US 34 Bypass grade separated $200,000 Yes $1,238,626,000 $812,161,000 Interchange at 107th Avenue , 94 14107 Foil Collins Mulberry 8 Canyon Intersection Improvements 51.740,000 Yes 11,240,366,000 $813,901,000 awe 94 H-133 Fort Collins Prospect-Lemay Intersection improvements 51,260,000 No' 51,241,626,000 542],]25,000 94 14160 Fort Collins Shields at Wlndrail No' 51,241,626,000 $427,725,000 94 H-208 Greeley 11th Avenue Widening $600,000 No 51.242.226,000 $428,325,000 a 94 14209 Greeley 23rd Avenue Widening and Bike Lane 53,350,000 No $1,245,576,000 5431.875,000 94 11-226 Greeley 11th Avenue Bridge Replacement $2,000,000 No 51,247,576.000 $433,675.000 94 H-24 Evans WCR 54(LCR 16)Widening from I-25 to CO 257 59.323.000 No' 51,256,899,000 5442,998,000 Mee 94 11-27 COOT -258 Crossroads Blvd.Interchange(Loveland) $22,000,000 Yes $1278,899,000 5835.901,000 94 H-31 COOT 4258 SH 56 Interchange(Berthoud) $32,000,000 Yes 11,310,899,000 5867,901,000 94 1432 COOT -258 SH 60 Interchange(Johnstown) 525,100,000 Yes $1,335,999,000 5893.001.000 94 H-38 COOT SH 392-East of Windsor to US 85(Lucerne) $14,500,000 Yes 51.350499,000 $90],501,000 94 H-41 COOT US 34 Bypass at 65th Avenue(ROW) $3,000,000 Yes 51,353,499,000 $910,501,000 94 H-42 COOT US 34 Bypass at 83rd Avenue(ROW) $1,000,000 Yes 51,354,499,000 $911,501,000 94 H52 COOT US 34:Glade Rd to Morning Or(W/O Loveland) $2,600,000 Yes $1,357,099,000 5914,101,000 1m. 94 +67 Greeley US 34 BusIneas(18th St)Improvements $14,000,000 Yes $1,371,099,000 $928,101,000 109 H-122 Fort CollinsTimberline Road Widening from 0.5 miles south of U7596.000 No $1,398,495,000 $470,394,000 Prospect to Vine 110 H-143 BP-34 Fort Collins River Taft Hill Road WldenInp from LaPorte to the Poudre 511,328,000 No $1,409,823,000 $481,722,000 — 111 F4197 Foil Collins McHugh Skeet-Elizabeth Street Roundabout $2,160,000 No $1.411.983,000 5483,882,000 112 H-101 Fort Collins Rd. Lemay Avenue Widening from Conifer to Country Club $10,740000 No $1,422,723,000 $494,622,000 112 H/05 Fort Collins LaPorte Impala to Bryan.Intersection at Taft, $10,290,000 No $1,433013,000 $504,912,000 roundabout at Impala _ _ r— 112 11-129 Fort Gains Elizabeth Skeet Widening from Skyline to Overland 513,092,000 No $1,46,105,000 $518,004,000 112 11-94 Fort CollinsLinden St widening from Jefferson to Redwood, $8,658,000 No $1,454,763,000 $526,662,000 Including the Vine Intersections 112 H-96 Fort Collins Lincoln-Rlversbete Lemay,4-trine Merial withBridge $9,895,000 No $1,464,658,000 $536,55],000 over Poudre River Pm 117 1480 Fort Collins Vine Drive Interchange at Interstate 25 $18,660,000 Yes $1,483,318,000 $946,761,000 118 1471 Greeley 107th Avenue and US 34 Interchange $25,000,000 Yes $1,508,318,000 $971,761,000 119 #19 Johnstown 1-25 and Johnson%Comer Interchange $25,000,000 Yes 51.533.318,000 $996,761,000 119 +216 Greeley US 85 lamPravemente Overpass Construction and 58,500.000 Yes 51,541,818,000 51,005,261,000 ISPI 119 14222 Greeley Crossroads Highway to Greeley $64,000,000 No" 51.605.618,000 $600,557,000 122 +93 Fort Collins Troutman Parkway Widening from Mason to Tanager $8,526,000 No $1,614,34,000 51109,083,000 123 H-104 Fort Collins JFWTroutnan Modern Roundabout $300,000 No $1,614,644,000 $609,383,000 E.Frontage Road-LCR 26(Crossroads Blvd.)to SH 124 141 BP-12 Larlmer County 392 54.500,000 No 51,619.14,000 $813,883,000 124 H-102 Fort Coins Intersection Improvements,Annual Capital $12,500,000 No $1,631,64,000 $626,383,000 124 H-103 Fort Collins Minor Streets Capital(Streets.Bridges,Railroads) $15,000,000 No $1,646,644,000 $641,383,000 Su 124 14108 Fort Collins Overland/Drake Intersection improvements $1,260,000 No 51,647,904,000 $642,643,000 124 H-112 Foil Collins Hickory-College to Shields $6,522,000 No 51.854428,000 5649.165,000 124 1+114 Fort Coons Vine-I-25 to 0.5 mile east of Lemay $15,540,000 No $1,669,966,000 $664,705,000 r— 124 14115 Fort Coffins Vine Realignment-College to 0.5 m9e east of Lemay $15,540,000 No $1,685,506,000 5880,245.000 121 H-116 Fort Collins Lemay-Southridge Green Blvd to Trilby 510,500,000 No $1,696,006,000 $690,745,000 124 H-120 FM CollinsR�Timberline Road widening-Trilby Road to Carpenter 58,100,000 No $1,704,106,000 $698,845,000 au 124 !4123 Fort Collins Mulberry Skeet Widening from Taft Hill Overland $10,40,000 No $1,714,54,000 $709285,000 Tall 121 14124 Fort Collins Taft Hill-Mulberry Intersection Improvements $1,260,000 No' $1.715,808,000 5710.515000 r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan r TABLE V-2 HIGHWAY PROJECTS On On-System Off-SyStem Rank Project AdCa' Submitting Agency Project Cost Est. State Cumulative Cost Mon Category Cumulative Cost Cumulative Cost System? an 124 H-126 Fort Collins lemay-Riverside Intersection improvements $1,260,000 No $1,717.066,000 $711.1105,000 124 14127 Fat Collins Elizabeth-Taft Hl6lntersecbon Improvements $2,220,000 No' $1,719,286,000 $714,025,000 124 14126 Fort Collins Overland Tmg-Elizabeth Intersection Improvements $1260,000 No 51.720,546,000 $715,285,000 ^ 124 H-130 BP-35 Fort Collins Trilby Road Widening from Timberline to College $17,700,000 No $1,738,248,000 $732,985,000 124 H-131 Fort Collins Prospect Road-overland Trail Intersection $2220,000 No $1,740,486,000 $735205000 Improvements 124 H-134 Fort Collins Prospect Road Widening from Interstale25 to County 57.080,000 No $1,747,546,000 $742,285,000 Roa5 ^ 124 H-135 Foil Collins Drake Road Widening from Taft Hill to Overland $12,060,000 No $1,759,606,000 $754.34.5,000 124 H-137 Fort Collins Drake Road Re-alignment at Ziegler Road $10,470,000 No $1,770,076,000 $764,815,000 124 H-140 BP-35 Fort Collins Trilby Road Widening from College Avenue to Taft Hill $12,360,000 No $1,782.438,000 $777,175,000 Road ^ 124 14141 Furl Coffins Overland Trait-County Road 42C intersection $3,912.000 No $1,766,346,000 $781,087,000 Improvements 124 14147 Fort Collins Lemay Street Re-Alignment at Partner Reservoir $6,924,000 No $1,793,272,000 $768,011,000 124 H-148 Fort Collins Lemay Avenue Widening from Trilby to Carpenter $10,260,000 No $1,803.532,000 $796271.000 tom 124 H-151 Fort Collins Timberline Road Widening from Vermont to Drake $7,788,000 No $1,811,320,000 $806,059,000 124 H-155 Fort Collins Trtlby Road-County Road 36(Fossil Creek Area) $14,100,000 No $1,825,420,000 $820,159,000 124 F4161 Fat Collins Fossil Creek Partway No $1,625,420,000 $820.159,000 124 H-164 Fort Collins Rock Creek Court Widening from Corbett Street to $11280,000 No $1,836,700,000 $831,439,000 ^ County Road 7 124 14165 Fat Collins Harmony Tech Parkway Construction between $4560,000 No $1,641,260,000 $835,999,000 Harmony and Rock Creek ' 124 H-166 Fort Collins Skyway Drive at South College Avenue No $1,841,260,000 $835,999,000 124 H-167 Fart Collins Avondale Road Connecting CR 32 and S.College $11,070,000 No $1,852,330,000 $847,069,000 ^ Avenue 124 H-168 Fort Collins East-West Road in Fossil Creek Area $9,680,000 No $1,861,990,000 $856,729,000 124 H-169 Fort Collins County Road 9 widening from Douglas to Mountain $10,860,000 No 51,872,850,000 5867,589,000 Vrsta 124 H-170 Fon Collins County Road 9 Construction from Mountain Vista b $13,680,000 No $1,886,530,000 $881,269.000 Timberline ^ 124 H-171 Fort Collins County Road 52 Widening Iron,West of County Road $14,430,000 No $1,900,960,000 $895,699,000 11 to East of 1-25 124 H-172 Fort Collin County Road 50 Widening East of Interstate 25 $2,400,000 No $1,903,360,000 $898,099,000 124 H-173 Fort Collins Mountain Vista Widening from Timberline to 1-25 $10,926,000 No $1,914,266,000 $909,025,000 ^ Mountain Vista Widening from County Road 11 to 124 H-174 Foil Collins $3,870,000 No $1,918,156,000 $912,895,000 Timberline 124 H-175 Fort Collins New Minor Arterial Located East of Timberline at $8,310,000 No $1,926,466,000 $921,205,000 Gaganey,SE of Conifer Street Extension 124 H-176 Fort Collins New Minor Mortal Connecting Vine Drive and 59,510,000 No $1,935,976,000 $930,715,000 Mountain Vista Dine ^ 124 H-178 Fort Collins Conifer Street Extension $8,100,000 No $1,944,076,000 $938,615,000 124 )4179 FM Collins "OIS Vine Widening from Redwood Street to North $3,000,000 No $1,947.076,000 $941,815,000 College Avenue 124 F4180 Fort Collins Douglas Road Widening from Shields to 1-25 $21,120,000 No $1,968,196,000 $962,935,000 ^ 124 H-181 Fort Collins Corbett Drive Extension $3,480,000 No $1,971,676,000 $966,415,000 124 H-182 Fat Collins Buckingham Street Widening $3,336,000 No $1,975.012,000 $969,751.000 124 H-163 Fort Collins Redwood Extension-Wino«to Spaulding $2,670.000 No $1,977,682,000 5972,421,000 ^ 124 F4184 Fort Collins Shields Street Widening from Vine to Highway 287 $9,420,000 No $1,987,102,000 $981,841,000 124 F4185 Fat Collins Willox Lane Widening from College to Shields $4.740,000 No $1,991,842,000 $966,581,000 124 H-186 Fort Collins Vine Drive Widening from Shields to Taft HR $5,340,000 No $1,997,182,000 $991,921,000 124 H-187 Fort Collins Overland Trail Widening born Michaud to LaPorte $7,350,000 No $2,004,532,000 $999,271,000 r 124 H-193 Fort Collins Taft HMI Project at Cathy Fromm°Prairie No $2.004,532.000 $999,271,000 124 F4194 Fort Collin Swallow Road Extension to Taft MO Road $2,670,000 No $2,007.202,000 51,001,941.000 124 H-195 Fort Collins Timberline at Willow Springs Widening No $2,007,202,000 $1,001,941,000 ^ 124 H-196 Fort Collins County Road 34 to Windsor Road No 52.007202,000 $1,001,941,000 124 H-199 Fort Collins Lemay-Horsetooh Intersection improvements $1,260,000 No $2,006,462,000 51.003201,000 124 H-53 Loveland Lehner County Road 26(Crossroads Blvd.)Widening- $4.300.000 No 52,012,762,000 $1,007,501,000 425 to LCR 9 as 124 H54 Loveland E.Frontage Road-US 34 to LCR 26(Crossroads $4,300,000 No $2,017,062,000 $1,011,801,000 Blvd.) 124 H57 Loveland LCR 9(Boyd Lake Ave)Widening-US 34 to LCR 32 $12,000,000 No 52.029.062.000 $1,023,601,000 124 1400 Fort Collins Timberline Road Widening dorm Vine to Mountain Vista $15,228,000 Flo $2,044,290,000 $1,039,029,000 ^ 124 H-05 Fat Colin Willow Street,from College to Lincoln $5298,000 No $2,049,588,000 $1,044,327,000 183 F472 Greeley Extension of Balsam Avenue to US 34 $330,000 No $2,049.918,000 51,044,657,000 err M r- 2025 Regional Transportation Plan TABLE V-2 r HIGHWAY PROJECTS On AdditionalOn-System Off-System Rank Project Category Cumulative Agency Project Cost Est. Stab C Cumulative ost CumulativeCost Cumulative Cost System? 184 1417 Johnstown South Loop Road(CR 44 to CR 17 Connection) 516,000,000 No $2,065,916,000 $1,060,657,000 184 H-18 Johnstown North Loop Road(CR 50) $15,000,000 No $2,080,918,000 $1,075,657,000 186 H-154 Fort Collins Sharpe Pointe Drive Connection to Drake Road $6,160,000 No $2,089,078,000 $1,083.817,000 Pus 187 H-106 Fat Collins Lemay/Trliby Modem Roundabout $2,520,000 No $2,091,598,000 $1,086,337,000 — 187 14149 Fort Collins Timberline Road Widening from Prospect to Vine $26,760,000 No $2,116,356,000 $1,113,097,000 187 H-150 Fort Collins Timberline Road Widening from Prospect to Harmony $35,220,000 No $2,153,578,000 $1,146,317,000 190 H-20 Johnstown 425 Frontage Road(SH 56 to US 34) 119,6600,000 No $2.173,176,000 $1,167,917,000 190 +206 Greeley 59th Avenue lour toning from 11534 Business to'C' $3000,000 No 12,176,176,000 $1,170,917,000 190 14210 Greeley 71st Avenue,US 34 Business to US 34 Bypass,four- $4,000,000 No $2,180,178,000 $1,174,917,000 laving 190 H-230 Greeley Two Byers Parkway/83MAvenue Corridor $12,000,000 No' $2,192,178,000 $1.188.917,000 Improvements 190 1426 Evans 47th Avenue Widening $600,000 No $2,192,778,000 $1,187,517,000 190 1456 Loveland LCR 9(Boyd Lake Ave)Widening and Realignment- $10,400,000 No $2,203,178,000 $1,197,917,000 US 34 to SH 402 190 H-543 Loveland UPRR Diagonal Road Consecution-LCR 11 10 425 E. $8,000,000 No $2,211,178,000 51,205,917,000 .44 Frontage Road 197 H-159 Fat Collins Paving of Unpaved Streets No 52,211,178,000 51,205,917,000 197 11-169 Fort Collins Scott Avenue Paving No $2211,170,000 $1,205,917,000 197 H-190 Fort Collins Frey Avenue Paving No $2,211,178,000 $1,205,917,000 s. 200 H-157 Fat Collins BAVA Neighborhood Sidewalks and Street No $2,211,178,000 $1,205,917,000 Improvements 201 H-118 Fort Collins Pavement Markings and Signs No $2,211,178,000 $1,205,917,000 201 H-35 COOT US 2878SH 68 Reconstruction(Fort Collins) $1,600,000 Yes $2,212,776,000 $1,006,661,000 201 H39 COOT SH 68 B Timberline Road Reconstruction(Fort Collins) 51,500.000 Yes $2,214,278,000 $1,006,361,000 201 H-50 CDOT US 267 8 LIS 34 Reconetruclon(Loveland) $1,500,000 Yes $2215,778,000 $1,009,881,000 205 H-204 Greeley 10th Street(l15 34 Business)and 10th Avenue $170,000 Yes 52,215.948,000 $1,010,031,000 Reconstruction 205 H-205 Greeley 10th Street(US 34 Business)and 11th Avenue $170,000 Yes $2,216,118,000 51,010201.000 Reconsimcion 205 H-229 Greeley Pavement Marking and Signs $300,000 No $2,216,418,000 51,206,217.000 208 H-158 Fat Collins Paving of Downtown Aliys No $2,216,418,000 $1,206,217,000 209 H-51 CDOT US 34 Bypass 8 17th Avenue Reconstruction(Greeley) $600,000 Yes $2,217,018,000 $1,010,801,000 tithe 210 14121 Fort Collins Canyon Avenue Parking-Olive to Magnolia $2,620,000 No $2219,638,000 $1,209,037,000 211 H-223 Greeley Greeley Enbyway Enhancements 51,685,000 Yes 52,221.523,000 11,012,486,000 UNCOMMITTED PROJECT TOTAL $2,221,523,000 $1,012,466,000 $1,209,037,000 r HIGHWAY GRAND TOTAL $2,305.728,000 $1,0%,53,000 $1,209,190,000 Off-System Road Identified as a Regionally Significant Corridor " New OffSystem Roadway W out Become a Regionally Significant Corridor :=Projects Committed in TIP Sit:@i 4:i*Mi '=Fiscally Constrained Projects 7 r r r • r poi 2025 Regional Transportation Plan r TABLE V•3 RAIL CROSSING PROJECTS Rank Project# Additional Cumulative Total onal Submitting Agency Project Capital Cost Category System Cost 17P Fo, CohIns Fprt Corms Pbwntown RaiiioadConsoh n Sfi 14 St 2Gffi000 ras El 2:66 atip !" TIP TOTAL $1,266,000 MjUj;Mi];l3PWIRgigigga:k14elePeREMENO 57#1 S1T eU8NSF RafimS kel'pesd' S 000,000r No $8,00O 00 LemayAvenue North Grade SeparatSSR.aEroad y ., ., 2 R(X}5; r H 07 �Fot1GWiEpe.: �clossing. .. 57313;000 No �. 5153`E$00(i 5 R(X}B : Polil5nliina<! Drake Read WeO0 Gait ON.00radeSepara 05. $L0®,000 No S2f1,M-000 4 R(X)-6 H-88 Fort Collins Timberline Road North,Grade Separated Railroad $13,260,000 No $33,573,000 Crossing at Vine Drive r 5 R(X)-16 Fort Collins Union Pacific RR Overpass at Windsor Road(CR 32) $5,000,000 No $38,573,000 6 R(X)-17 Fort Collins Grade Separation on Mountain Vista Drive West of I-25 $5,000,000 No $43,573,000 7 R(X)-8 Fort Collins BNSF Railroad Grade Separation at Trilby Road $3,500,000 No $47,073,000 8 R(X)-11 H-154 Fort Collins Sharpe Pointe Drive,RR Crossing $600,000 No $47,673,000 9 R(X)-13 H-93 Fort Collins Troutman Pathway(Grade Separation or Crossing) $5,000,000 No $52,673,000 10 R(X)-12 Fort Collins Lake Street Crossing,West of College $300,000 No $52,973,000 10 R(X)-7 Fort Collins BNSF Railroad Crossings,Downtown Fort Collins $250,000 No $53,223,000 12 R(X)-14 Fort Collins Annual Railroad Crossing Improvement Program $9,600,000 No $62,823,000 13 R(X)-10 Fort Collins Keenland Drive,New RR Crossing $540,000 No $63,363,000 14 R(X)-19 Greeley UPRR and GWRR crossing material upgrade across 6th $101,000 No $63,464,000 law St.,7th St.,8th St.,21st St.and 23rd Ave. 15 R(X)-15 Fort Collins Union Pacific RR Overpass at Trilby Road $5,000,000 No $68,464,000 Project Costs also included with Highway Category -$26,173,000 UNCOMMITTED PROJECT TOTAL $42,291,000 RAIL CROSSING GRAND TOTAL $43,557,000 t' =Project Committed in TIP • `=Fiscally Constrained Projects • r r r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan TABLE V-4 rue PASSENGER RAIL PROJECTS O8M Cosh On Rank Project k Submitting Agency Project Capital Cost Score Cumulative Cumulative Total Pam (24 years) System Capital Cost Cost :: RLP].19:.!lWMProittR9lmmMpO Cdrn]prP[+3s9frauM 3E3eg�ennlfia9se9g9rRt(PhBsp: Sadd9d0iftj Nq 422 $5011dik121G i3D.M1dA#k;{ 2 R(P)-3 North Frail Range MPO Phase II Inter Regional Passenger Rail-US 34 to Fort $270,900, $331,200,000 No 222 $300,900,000 $632,100,0001 ... Collins and Greeley 3 R(P)-4 North Front Range MPO Phase IInter-Regional Passenger Rail-Weld County $126,400.000 $168,000,000 No 217 $427,300,000 $926,500,000 Road 38 to US 34 4 R(P)-2 North Front Range MPO Inba-Regional Passenger Rail Service $193,600,000 $307,200,000 No 208 $620,900,000 $1,427,300,000 Corridor Preservation Cost included in Inter-Regional and Inba-Regional Passenger Rail Projects -$30,000,000 -$30,000,000 -$30,000,000 PASSENGER RAIL TOTAL _ $590,900,000 $806,400,000 $590,900,000 $1,397,300,000 /44 ::=Fiscally Constrained Projects r '.e W • r• r" r r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan a TABLE V-5 TRANSIT PROJECTS Rank Project# Submitting Agency Project Cost Est. Cumulative Cost : `:FoilCo i...; ::. 8t.fr.PrE:>St::.gTr sfo:::.'J:::::c:': °: '€ : :i',° :::::;:::' :': :. — j`�5.6:..: ortCoina ;:::::;'::'::;:::Conhrru8ionfi;ExiSrng r3r2 : r�_S6Mc0 . .:......:..............:.:..:.. .. S`137;3'12;858 Sl37312:85&' .Colin• "!.`. `::.[ :' '.: T-6Di FoiiCols ': :::::::::. •:.:::•:•::::•:::::.::::::::::::•:••:•:•: ;• .H,: ::8 :•::::•.::.:::::•:•:„:•:„: : 3 ........ CES :: .:: •:. .::.....•. ....:.:.. :•••] acemer4.ranst...andeslzo.: ....}....;.:...::.:..:.:: ..: :: ...:::: .:;... S.:. .::8.dt134S.:....:.Si38;2S�>t4¢ ?ifi i art C lins.. aceme»1Cid8e8r200�67' '� i':� �[ai' Ea:'i::":�:��s��f ��`� :�::::;::::::,�::;:°:; '::::::.:::.:::: :.�� ::...:...:. ..: C�S'::.:. ....2.. 0 l;ieP.::::.... ...:f ; .3689Q9A.:. ::8?�Fi.8B0654. • ... .8F €::Fort C m a enl.t?us ':`.�:�4'f.1':["::::::'t':i: ::.:.:: CE... a �... ... .... ... ..... .S... • ..,... (t40 :.:.: -6146,§D1;fi94 :: -90 Fort Coilin ,:';:': :S'E: `;i':::":[a i E [? :: '[' i::• 's f ::,••::.:C:':.:'..`:;:a-.: CAS::' . AB:.:. ::.. .. ...$.:..: .:.: .:�eRlacs+?iai#B72ses;t�0'l 1.:.::. .:.........:.. .;......:...:...::.: : S::: .6<0�25Bd2. P492628296 Coffins Ra iasennienYBnsns 20.8. i: `::�'s;.:: � ;::€��'�;;�;�:;'s:::;'E: .::<:' :�: ........... .......... ortC ...... ... .......p......,.; ..:..:f ..:.:J:..:��.:.:�. . .......:....:...;.:::. ..:.:.�.:.��:.��:.:.. . . 3:!� :::fi;$23i808:::'� :$?5s,�982:1(id "':TAQ•:•:. Fod Co h.• .. .. .Re is A . .t:..221....:.:.:.:::: :.:..:.:.::.:....::.:...::.: S :• :::6;�8r;3s':"::SiE21 •2f! Ca:Ss': .Cares Y Conhiwat one Exlnt..g. t>r alRaOte$°earafroriatj:&:Evsnin�:Cremend� ' `�:�AT.68800(i�E:s;:�2(3I�47T-027F g. 5 .::. ..:... .. Gre:-••: ;•• ,:: ,''::,:;:: :Transif ve •AicirxV,fa ntenarixs:Equ.Pment... [scement... ..... ,6:;: .:.Yt.U,0U0. ::•: 204�d9fA2D n itV ;hif o I c f:.._n i tion:ofFrtdri 7 :::: :Tra.—: a1n.......f?a eme:lF_:r.:Ca Jnpa.......... 6 • .••:: .;. CAS ::::f:TSO::•.••:G.reele: : • S: • 258t..4tQ';ii '. 2D7sf 420 lovefa d .::..: enyot(e(we eYJ asa s7anes):. .: . :.;;.;.. :.:: :b.::..::4<004<000 r�a: ... :vetaid':::;;° _<,.,::: O-e,ating :.CESv;.•:: ..•tousle. 0 eratn A' .. ....00;:.2'002«2 5. :.: ::::::::::.:: ':::<::: ::: ::�:::::::.: ;:;::;� .... ... ... . <::::.;r...,,..g:..s �an.,:::f...:...:..Qa:3 :...::.......:...:..::.:.:. ::. s. ..f. , 6a;ooR:: ..�..:.:.>..:.a....a C✓S 8:.:.:.:......:....:.:• Bus R p;acementa;> tsJn _:::::::.::::.:..:::.:::..:..::::::.::.::.::: ::::.:::::::.::: ::. : 6::::.::.840,004: :.::S 2?9,7S0;42i# r: fi: :: :.V... aar'..g:'Gou` fiu ""ti' '::f:.: . 'i:.i;:.":�::::' :L'€5::,.:;:; ?2;;:; Ra.erand._:'°':::: .. . .x27.r:.. MY,...(a.1.Tnana� (Ex.i.ngj..:.:..:::.:.:�.:.....:.:.:.:..... .......... ..S..��.9,7.f#1:6©8 ::.::'':: : ::.,F.::: E` . .24.. fa t tiro ::_.::≥: : .o.,t O "rih$1:So • :: q: ::::: :.C. S;.. ::.. L;vafan..ta,:o!tGons..:fa! ;q... uce.tExl t .9)..:.::...::..::....: . �.:: .....1x1L1 'f:..... 52365913s ReionalVan oo 4 ::•:$2 93047: .. 3fs.36 nps s.. 247 8 4.5 . ... ...... ....... ..... ......... • •Weld CnUrfl:'. : " Weld Count lletwiorlSiioh#a:rani' Elde d fDisabletl'. :::: .:• :: • 's` f8'Otl54�8i;::;; 26993'891 — '..:Fort. oilins't:"�s:':;;: G .:.. BnsFac/hh.irxaansvn• :'; [:::' • ••.;.:: - ";:::':: :':;::::!€::;:;':" :;;"'",:E;: :::�6d4i004f• S...2 .>33589.. FDit;G017 C •ollins ... Meson�Ye9t R7gilf4.W•eY:.:.::..:.:.:..::•::•:•:.::...:.. :•• ••::::•.. T::`:�..7,..39,ti0D ;5..::279269:881 �'Ci:!::;:Foit.CoiNs ..CSff.T{ansi(:C�iiter�.::::: :.:::::::::::::::: . . . . . 3358,(Yf70.. :.Lou • !' . :.:.:::.:::::... .o stand•::: ;::!:':..::[: Love+anUMain.enance.Fac9?y:.....:..;..:::: ::.: .:::..::.:.:...:.:.: .:..:::. :::::::::.. fi _ .,525af0b3 ! 287;35. 891 a TIP and CES TOTAL - $ 287,152,891 r ...................... NFf . ::..:.....:..ffe.,.. .....:.:.. :.Rr. . : ...:.... ..,.. ..-.::p...:.Q9R�..::.,a! ::..-.F.:.. o> ::.:.<...::.:<.::.::;::.:.,:.:.:.:::.:..:::::..:.S...:.;.:; R .:::::;..:,.:::. S 14 . .. . ......................................................... .......:;:..::;:. �:::� ">.: :e::.: ,:'..::.;:.: , .::>...:.>...:::�:::� :.::.::.....:.....:::.:.:. '::. ..::::>:::..::...::<:.':..::...:.::.;:.:.:s.:.:�':.:_:.:tee::.:.:":.:.:�.::....�::�:.::.:..::�.�...�:.:�.::::..`.:.;.::.::..::.:�.;::.:..:..:.::... ��:�:.:.:>? .�.:.:�:.>�;;_.:.:�:....:':.:�:'r�:: ::s:':%':: IVFR.ii1P{3: ::.>:.:::::;S.:.::::; ree[e .aa:Denver.:Re_..rail:'ftdits8':SeMte?Ne4u:s t:: .�::` :::':::S: .... .. ....:......... — ,..::�...:�..:... � � ......::.::::::::::.:: . ::::s�,u, ,w8,� e�b�r��scro..::..:...:..:...:::.:.,:::.:.:::::.::::..,:::.:::::....::�.:.:.,...: uuu:;:::::: ;��ssas ..::...:::..::.. .:::Add:fiouia:9Garanan:serrtls.dosmimtmWE:.Hatmon ;:::<:x'::':::>::::::.:::::::::::;::.::::;.. .. ...:::.....,,.,...::..,,.,:.;.,:::: ?...:....-.:.:.::..:..::...::.:::..:.:. ..,:.:.:... .. . .:.:..:..::.:...::.: . ..._. _. _..... ...... .... ...:..,.:.,.,,..,:..:��::.::.:::..�:.,:.,:.:�..-,:.:..:.:�.::..:;:..:.:..:._:.:::::.:.::::.�:..::,:::'t, s�::;S93;$78s5..0J :..::..:.::..::..:..:.:.,:.::::...:.....::.:..».....::::.•.:...::.::.:Tra non:rrannfar:C�rlter,>:,,::::.:,:::: :.:.:::.::::::•;.::.:..:.::.:_:.;;:.::.::.::.:...::.:,:., ::,.:.::.::..:..:.:.::.....:,.;.;::.;::.:.::.::.::..:::,:.:::..:.,:. . .. ospona 2.:' :>':j:.''�T«7�OE::. emoe:`rr.Ii:[ `rr"? ::'i!:3.lYSedl":.;:,`Gf!':S}i`itEC'::: :<; y z:.tt::':. 7Euen ?=!: :<:': :.': '::1:::c: i:i isr`: '`ii:',:�:: g ::::::::::_.::�<.5:.::!.:r:L ._ .:.:.:.:.::. .: :.::..::.:::...:.:. .:...Qk..Y....: Gsf7C..:;!9.:._.::!.:....� MC Ei1 .C1el+ .::.... ..... ..:.:.....::: ....:: S:....:.: ,:':24 ...�:...:.:S3k,.4.1.2..,.553 ...:: : ':'.: `.:.:'.::::<5.`!<d t.c.:e and i::: ?:: !o 7 ':,j ns,fl::S:::::v�cc;,_r::::;r:::: !..:' ><<t:'':;::' :: .' �;::t::7.<:::.;b'': iu�F'(1 xpatxled tflvelantl u�fon Cvifins Craastt&endca:tNevr? �:._ xAF 5.766 .. S10�, tn$,324 Naivtaauts:9' tMlell?Tranei[8ewice�Sovni.Transit:GenterYo?::::;::::: r;":: �::::::::,'::; ":.:=:i :'::: :::::::: >.:.::.:::::::::.:. Far4t;oHins:.::.r ::::.::.:. ::::::.::::-:;::-:.;.:-.,....-::;:;:.;: :::.:::::�::.:.:>.>::..:-::..:::::::,::<:::::::: :...:. ........... ....:..:..... .... . . . . ...... EiamtotrY:ardr8r,trerime.....................:..:.:.,..:..:......:,: �.::_..:...:.. r- .. 2025 Regional Transportation Plan r TABLE V-5 TRANSIT PROJECTS r• Rank Project N Submitting Agency Project Cost Est. Cumulative Cost InratasedfrequenuyronRouteltransttseMoedSWrltSWttoffanruxty g '1 T84; 9att airs &increased;frequetncyonRoute1C$EastHarmonp&125 % 9X>03875.: $11 3 088 9811 Transpvnativn Transfer Censpt 4g;*0 nowmMPO FottGofns-Denvertkitiom Transit Senrlce(New) €.9,388.565 $122,477525 ^ 11 T-105 Greeley EcoPass-Greeley/Evans $ 648,000 $123,125,525 12 T-51 Greeley UNC Shuttle Service Between Gunter Hall and Student Center,Parking, $ 2,319,432 $125,444,957 Housing ^� 13 T-28 Greeley Transit Service-Promentory Service $ 724,080 $126,169,037 14 T-5 Loveland "Transit Center"Architectural Plan Development $ 150,000 $126,319,037 ^ 14 1-59 Fort Collins Complimentary Demand Response Service(2002-04) $ 14,837,760 $141,156,797 14 T-61 Fort Collins Complimentary Demand Response Service(2005-07) $ 8,588,974 $149,745,771 ^ 17 T-12 Loveland "Transit Center"Construction Plan Development(Ph 1 of 2) $ 1,500,000 $151,245,771 18 T-104 Greeley Hospitality Ambassadors-Greeley/Evans $ 266,000 $151,511,771 .. 19 T-54 Greeley West HWY 34 Business Transit Service Expansion-Promentory Service $ 3,006,368 $154,518,139 20 T-15 Loveland "Transit Center"Construction Plan Development(Ph 2 of 2) $ 1,000,000 $155,518,139 ^ 21 T-10 Loveland Increase Frequency(Short-term) $ 4,986,000 $160,504,139 21 T-65 Fort Collins Increased Frequency of Transit Service on Route 3 Constitution to $ 1,252,458 $161,756,597 Downtown ^ 21 T-67 Fort Collins Increased Frequency of Transit Service on College Avenue&W. $ 4,213,026 $165,969,623 Harmony from South Transit Center to Front Range Community College 21 1-68 Fort Collins Evening Service(2002-04) $ 5,494,776 $171,464,399 ^ Increased Frequency of Transit Service on Shields Route 6 during CSU $ 3,394,534 $174,858,933 21 T-73 Fort Collins sessions 21 T-74 Fort Collins Increased Frequency on Route 2 transit service from West Drake, $ 4,190,084 5179,049,017 Overland&Prospect to Colorado State University - 21 T-76 Fort Collins Increased Frequency of Transit Service on all Route 3 $ 1,432,196 $180,481,213 21 T-77 Fort Collins Increased Frequency on Foxtrot(Route 1 B)between Fort Collins and $ 13,377,572 $193,858,785 Loveland ^ 21 1-78 Fort Collins Increased Frequency on existing transit route 5 from downtown to $ 3,892,772 $197,751,557 South Transit Center on Lemay 21 1-80 Fort Collins Evening Service(2005-07) $ 6,361,080 $204,112,637 21 T-83 Fort Collins Complimentary Demand Response Service(2008-10) $ 10,439,218 $214,551,855 21 T-85 Fort Collins Increased frequency on Route 4 transit service $ 8,446,323 $222,998,178 .. 21 T-86 Fort Collins Increased frequency on Extended Route 3 transit service $ 7,725,771 $230,723,949 21 1-87 Fort Collins Increased frequency of transit service on Shields Route 6 when CSU $ 2,413,207 $233,137,156 not in session ,.", 21 T-88 Fort Collins Increased frequency on all Route 2 transit service $ 5,091,819 $238,228,975 21 T-89 Fort Collins Increased frequency of Transit Service on Route 9 from Downtown to $ 7,787,503 $246,016,478 South Transit Center via Timberline 21 T-90 Fort Collins Increased frequency on Route 8 transit service $ 6,898,779 $252,915,257 d,,,, r r- 2025 Regional Transportation Plan ►" TABLE V-5 TRANSIT PROJECTS r- Rank Project# Submitting Agency Project Cost Est. Cumulative Cost 21 T-91 Fort Collins Increased frequency on Extended Route 9 transit service $ 1,100,671 $254,015,928 21 T-92 Fort Collins Evening Service(2008-10) $ 7,731,984 $261,747,912 '„ 21 T-95 Fort Collins Evening Service(2011-25) $ 15,162,720 $276,910,632 41 T-47 Greeley Transit Two-Way Communications Equipment Replacement $ 79,000 $276,989,632 .... 41 T-7 Loveland Communication System Equipment $ 75,000 $277,064,632 43 T-46 Greeley Transit Service From Outlying Areas of Greeley and Evans $ 5,470,848 $282,535,480 44 T-29 Greeley Addl Service Hours for Evening Demand Response Service $ 430,560 $282,966,040 44 T-30 Greeley Addl Service Hours for Paratransit Service $ 1,565,200 $284,531,240 44 T-39 Greeley Increased Frequency of Transit Service on 10th Street $ 3,006,368 $287,537,608 44 T-40 Greeley Increased Frequency of Transit Service on 16th Street $ 3,006,368 $290,543,976 44 T-41 Greeley Increased Frequency of Transit Service on 28th Avenue $ 3,006,368 $293,550,344 44 T-42 Greeley Increased Frequency of Transit Service on 4th Street $ 3,006,368 $296,556,712 44 T-52 Greeley UNC Shuttle Service Between Student Center and 3001 8th Avenue $ 2,319,432 $298,876,144 (State Farm Facility) 51 T-58 Fort Collins Bus stop Accessibility Modification(2004-04) $ 69,480 $298,945,624 51 T-69 Fort Collins Bus stop Accessibility Modification(2005-07) $ 69,480 $299,015,104 ,.. 51 T-81 Fort Collins Bus stop Accessibility Modification(2008-10) $ 69,480 $299,084,584 51 T-94 Fort Collins Bus stop Accessibility Modification(2011-25) $ 150,000 $299,234,584 IS 55 T-35 Greeley Downtown Transfer Center Improvements $ 200,000 $299,434,584 55 T-53 Greeley UNC Transfer Center Design and Construction $ 432,260 $299,866,844 'e. 57 T-66 Fort Collins New Transit Route 3 Extension between Colorado State University $ 5,505,018 $305,371,662 main campus and south campus 57 T-71 Fort Collins New Route 4 transit service Downtown,Taft Hill/Horsetooth&Dunbar $ 6,949,796 $312,321,658 "' 57 T-72 Fort Collins New Route 9 transit service from Downtown to South Transit Center via $ 6,718,148 $319,039,806 Timberline 60 T-17 NFR MPO Fort Collins to Greeley Transit Service(New) $ 7,780,005 $326,819,811 IS 60 T-25 NFR MPO Fort Collins-Longmont Regional Transit Service(New) $ 6,735,477 $333,555,288 62 T-31 Greeley Bus Stop Accessibility Improvements $ 600,000 $334,155,288 ,.. 63 T-70 Fort Collins Transfort Bus Facility Expansion(2005-07) $ 12,496,000 $346,651,288 64 T-38 Greeley Farebox Replacement $ 90,000 $346,741,288 ,.. 65 T-20 NFR MPO Loveland to Greeley Transit Service(New) $ 7,780,005 $354,521,293 65 T-36 Greeley East 8th St Transit Service Expansion(Weld/Greeley Airport) $ 3,006,368 $357,527,661 65 T-93 Fort Collins Phase I Incremental Expansion of Transit Service(2011-15) $ 109,278,178 $466,805,839 r i 2025 Regional Transportation Plan ►� TABLE V-5 TRANSIT PROJECTS Rank Project# Submitting Agency Project Cost Est. Cumulative Cost 65 T-97 Fort Collins Phase II Incremental Expansion of Transit Service(2016-2020) $ 109,278,178 $576,084,01 65 T-99 Fort Collins Phase III Incremental Expansion of Transit Service(2020-25) $ 109,278,178 $685,362,19 70 T-37 Greeley Expansion of Transit Service Center Administration Facility $ 75,000 $685,437,19 71 1-63 Fort Collins Increased Frequency of Transit Service on College Avenue $ 12,319,724 $697,756,91 71 T-64 Fort Collins Increased Frequency of Transit Service on Route 2 $ 7,240,004 $704,996,92 73 T-1 Loveland Transit Vehicle/Maintenance Facility Design $ 150,000 $705,146,92 73 T-11 Loveland Transit Vehicle Maintenance Facility(Ph 3 of 3) $ 1,000,000 $706,146,92 73 T-2 Loveland Transit Vehicle Maintenance Facility(Ph 1 of 3) $ 1,500,000 $707,646,92 73 T-9 Loveland Transit Vehicle Maintenance Facility(Ph 2 of 3) $ 2,500,000 $710,146,92 77 T-34 Greeley Demand Response Reservations,Scheduling,and Reporting Software $ 100,800 $710,247,72 77 1-45 Greeley Transit Services Management Information System Upgrade $ 75,000 $710,322,72 77 T-48 Greeley Transit Vehicle Global Positioning System $ 200,000 $710,522,72 77 T-6 Loveland Dispatching Software $ 35,000 $710,557,72 81 T-32 Greeley Conference Shuttle $ 453,200 $711,010,92 UNCOMMITTED PROJECT TOTAL $711,010,92 TRANSIT GRAND TOTAL $998,163,81 + ....................... s':Committed Resources:"CES" =continuation of existing service;"TIP"=project committed in TIP MENEMIESM=Fiscally Constrianed Projects • r' r. r� a n r- 2025 Regional Transportation Plan r TABLE V-6 TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT PROJECTS Submitting Annual Cumulative Rank Project Agency Project Cost EM. Cost Years Cost SM gwna ARTTnpsi lTrih1behrandWtanagenient A 7DM`9 Smart Trips $15 9t12 fN10 $662;595 2& $15 9412 4H31 pr4grm»;Existirrgy 2 Tt)M-8 Fort Collins Fotttofns Tratispnrtatron 4lemarui Management $i 8 24 3000 $TB a,000 2d : $ 4 14Z Qua 3 TRM=7 Greeley Less Tanang Coanmuter$erreMs in Weld County $7961)(10 $33 000 24 $34,9380©4) TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT TOTAL $34,938,000 .. ..................................:=Fiscally Constrained Projects • r r' l r r r r r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan rs TABLE V-7 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT Rank Project# Submitting Agency Project Cost Est. Annual Years Cumulative Cost Cost t ISM�1 North Front Range M , iRegxan vhde Planning Studies $6 66U,04it $27&406 24.:.: $66(!0 4tID T$ North Frc nt Range MIS( Dton wjde rote geM transporlatttul System .; $B 4 r 5131#tt1 D4tk $ T$M.t$ Lavgtand:, kovslaad CFS Psojack " 56 1 DtMt 593 :D4U 7"Sirtri Fart eollins AduancedTratfltmOttlgemetitSy$tem in diteg itass $6 Dpp Dtifi $1H 95U 40€G 5 TSM-3 Greeley t;reete T ftcO. y pcn°a'tlona Center $1'745 400 555•E144 2d � $2tj 395,4DQ b TSM4 Greeley Vaaabte Messages$lgn$in Grey 3300 O00 520 9g5 40k} T TSM-5 Greeley Closetf initVidep Momtping Staj'ion an Grcaley :52.5,400 $21,47Q,44{1 _ s TSM 12 Fort L ollins Fort Collins Tra(0c Ope at ons Fagttty $4 4Ua 444 $25 470,400 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT TOTAL $25,070,000 r' ..._.._....._..__._.._..___... =Fiscally Constrained Projects • r r r r n r • r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan 3. Rail Projects I- Since Rail projects fall into two very distinct categories, these projects are presented in two separate tables. Table V-3 shows Rail Crossing projects, which consists of safety ^ improvements, new crossings, or grade-separated roadway crossings of railroad tracks. The Vision Plan includes 15 uncommitted Rail Crossing projects with a total estimated cost of $42.3 million. ^ Table V-4 shows the four Passenger Rail projects. These projects consist of the three phases of the passenger rail system proposed in the North Front Range Transportation Alternatives Feasibility Study (TAFS), as well as a Corridor Preservation project which includes strategic right-of-way acquisition, financial planning, and environmental analysis for all three phases of the Passenger Rail Vision Plan. Passenger Rail construction cost estimates total $590.9 million. Operation and maintenance costs shown for Passenger Rail system are shown to be .- $806.4 million; however, this estimate is an unrealistically high one, representing operation and maintenance costs over the entire 24-year period of the RTP. P- 4. Transit Projects Projects in the transit element of the Vision Plan are shown on Table V-5. This table shows that a continuation of existing transit service in the region, along with the four transit projects committed in the 2001-2006 TIP, represent$287.2 million. Additional projects include expansion of existing Transit service and provision of new Transit service. Expansion of existing service includes new bus routes, extensions of existing bus routes, and increased frequency and hours of operations for the existing bus systems in Fort Collins, Loveland and Fort Collins, as well as expanded vanpool and paratransit services. New transit services include additional services between North Front Range communities and between the North .- Front Range and Longmont to the south. Uncommitted Transit projects are estimated to cost $711.0 million. As is the case for Passenger Rail projects, cost estimates (except as otherwise indicated) include the assumption that operation and maintenance costs are extended over the 24-year planning period; therefore, cost estimates in this category are on the conservative (high) side. 5. Travel Demand Management Projects As shown in Table V-6, three Travel Demand Management (TDM) projects were submitted, with the vast majority consisting of continuation of the SMARTTrips regional travel demand management program and the Fort Collins transportation demand management program. These projects are the regional and local TDM programs, both of which include many efforts aimed at relieving dependency on the single-occupant vehicle. The cost for TDM projects is estimated at $34.9 million over the 24-year planning period from 2002 to 2025. FELSBURG �Nu HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 72 r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan 6. Transportation System Management Projects Table V-7 lists the eight Transportation Systems Management (TSM) projects that are included in the Vision Plan. Included are seven projects that fall into the broad category of"Intelligent ._ Transportation Systems" (ITS), along with a Region-wide Planning Studies project. The total cost for TSM projects is estimated at$25.1 million. r r r elm 0 IPFELSBURG ►. C4HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 73 — 2025 Regional Transportation Plan VI. 2025 FISCALLY CONSTRAINED PLAN 2025 Regional Transportation Plan r.. VI. 2025 FISCALLY CONSTRAINED PLAN The Fiscally Constrained Plan is comprised of the high priority project from the Vision Plan that are likely to be funded by the year 2025 based upon the financial resources that are projected to be available to the region. A. Resource Allocation _ Resource Allocation was one of the two primary elements in the plan development process, as illustrated in Figure 1-2. Resource Allocation is a policy of Council reflecting how the limited resources available for transportation system improvements in the region should be distributed among the six project categories in order to best achieve the vision and goals of the plan. The Council's Resource Allocation among the project categories for the 2025 RTP is as follows: Transit 22.0% Rail 22.8% (Passenger Rail 20.3%) (Highway/Rail Crossings 2.5%) Bicycle/Pedestrian 4.2% Travel Demand Management 4.2% Transportation System Management 4.1% Highway/HOV 42.7% B. Funding Estimates Estimates of available federal, state and local funding for the plan period from 2002 to 2025 are shown in Table VI-1. As noted, sources for these revenue projections include CDOT estimates, extrapolation from the 2020 RTP and from the 2001-2006 North Front Range Region Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), and Regional Transportation Services and Funding Feasibility Study projections. All funding estimates are stated in constant (year 2001) dollars, although, as noted, several of the funding categories are projected to be expanded at a rate of three percent per year. r — itFELSBURG r' HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 74 r- 2025 Regional Transportation Plan Table VI-1 Estimates Of Available Funding r '� ,,�'P 'f`sp vyrarry"yay aL°iI"'�"s P `st "` Y�. , 4 , •, - ;'PO 3[!f •F�dBTB�s`�a�� 'T0�01, i9� � n ($M?`.,_ ($M) : Total Other Regional Priorities 123.1 210.0 333.1 34.0 Small Urban 2 3.9 0.5 4.4 0.4 Enhancements 15.2 3.8 19.0 1.9 CMAQ J•4 33.8 8.2 42.0 4.3 Strategic Projects ' 131.0 - 131.0 13.3 Transit (Bus, Rail) " 203.4 247.8 451.2 46.1 Total 510.4 470.3 980.7 100.0 Based on 2020 RTP allotment and expanded to 2025 at 3 percent per year. 2 Because program ends in 2004, used funds from TIP for 2002-2004 F. s Based on TIP 2002-2006, expanded at 3 percent per year. ° Available only to the Fort Collins area. 5 This is a maximum estimate based on CDOT sources, a portion of which may be expended on projects in the Upper Front Range RTP. 6 Based on TIP 2002-2006, expanded at 3 percent per year; except assume 2 times TIP funds for 3 out-of-the-ordinary capital projects (Fort Collins bus facility expansion, CSU transit center and Loveland maintenance facility). Source: Regional Transportation Services and Funding Feasibility Study, Kimley Horn & Associates, Inc., November, 2000 Total funding estimates total $980.7 million for the 24-year plan period. Federal and state funding accounts for $510.4 million, or 52% of the total. Local funding, including local government and private contributions, are projected to be $470.3 million, or 48% of the total. Following are brief descriptions of the six funding categories listed in Table VI-1. Other Regional Priorities: The federal/state part of these funds is largely the portion of federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds and State Highway Users Trust Fund dollars that are allocated by CDOT to the North Front Range region. Federal guidelines on use of these funds is relatively flexible in terms of project categories, with some improvement types within each of the NFR's six project categories eligible; however, the Colorado Transportation Commission has historically limited spending of these funds to projects on the State Highway System. Local funding estimates included under Other Regional Priorities are estimates of local and county government expenditures for both local match for federally funded projects and NIPFELSBURG r 4HOLT ULLEVIG Page 75 r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan locally financed improvement projects, as well as estimates of private contributions that can be expected toward financing of major roadways. r Small Urban: This federal funding source has generally been used by the NFR for transportation systems management and travel demand management projects such as traffic signals, planning studies, and carpool and vanpool projects. This program is scheduled to end in 2004. • Enhancement: Enhancement funds represent ten percent of federal STP funds. Eligible project types include pedestrian and bicycle facilities, historic preservation, transportation aesthetics, and water quality. Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ): CMAQ funds are aimed at improvements that will contribute to attainment of air quality conformity, thus only the Fort Collins non-attainment area is eligible. CMAQ funds in the NFR have generally been used to finance the Fort Collins portion of the region's SMARTTrips travel demand management program. Strategic Projects: The Strategic Project program, commonly referred to as the "7th Pot", is a funding program targeted by the Colorado Transportation Commission at investments in strategic corridors throughout the state. The 1-25 corridor through the North Front Range and Upper Front Range planning areas is one of those strategic corridors. These funds could be used for 1-25 corridor highway projects or regional passenger rail implementation. r Transit: The federal/state portion of Transit funds consists of Federal Transit Administration funding in various capital, operational, and maintenance funding programs, all of which are specifically targeted at transit service. Local funds in the transit category represent local matches for these federal funds, as well as continuation of the overmatch that the Cities of Fort Collins, Greeley, and Loveland have applied to bus systems within each of those cities. C. Committed Resources A significant portion of the $980.7 million total resources described in the previous section has already been committed to projects and programs, thus is not eligible to be allocated to new projects in the RTP. Table 6.2 shows the total resource allocations by project category, the committed resources, and the remaining uncommitted resources. Committed resources, totaling an estimated $374.4 million, are of two types. The largest portion is the $287.2 million estimated to continue the region's existing transit services over the 24-year planning period. An additional $87.2 million is committed in the 2001-2006 TIP. Funding for completion of all projects that are included in the 2001-2006 TIP are considered to be committed, so funds listed in the TIP for"Future Years" are included in the Committed Resources listed in Table 6.2. In addition, committed projects are indicated at the top of Tables V-1 through V-7 by shading. Table 6.2 shows that $606.2 million are estimated to be available for allocation to new projects in the 2025 Fiscally Constrained Plan. The uncommitted funds for Transit and Passenger Rail are shown as a single amount, since the Council elected to view funding for bus, vanpool and passenger rail service expansions as a single pot of money to be allocated. r doi FELSBURG r ll HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 76 r r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan The right-hand column of Table 6.2 shows the percentage of the $606.2 million in available funds for each project category. It should be noted that the percentages of uncommitted funds - differ substantially from the Council's initial resource allocation because of funds that have been committed. For example, the Council's resource allocation for Transit and Passenger Rail is 42.3% (22.0% for Transit, 20.3% for Passenger Rail) while the percentage of uncommitted .. resources for these two categories is only 21.1%; this reflects the large share of transit resources that are dedicated to continuation of existing transit service. Table VI-2 r Committed and Uncommitted Resources ._ Resott'rco Total Resource Committed Uncommitted . Uncommitted Ailooatio fi Altocation.. Rosuakoeel: Resourcesz Resource Project'Categort Percentages : { ($Millions) ' ($Milliohs) . ($Miillbn's). „Percentage Bike/Pedestrian 4.2% 41.2 1.7 39.5 6.5% r Highway/HOV 42.7% 418.8 84.2 334.6 55.2% Rail 22.8% 223.6 1.3 r Highway Rail Crossings 2.5% 24.5 1.3 23.2 3.8% Passenger Rails Crossings 20.3% 199.1 - Transit(Bus&Vanpool) 22.0% 215.7 287.2 127.6' 21.9 ii- Travel Demand Management 4.2% 41.2 - 41.2 6.8% ... Transportation System 4.1% 40.2 - 40.2 6.6% Management Total 100% 980.7 374.4 606.3 100% r Includes 2002-2006 and future commitments in current TIP and continuation of existing transit service over 24-year 2 plan period Uncommitted resources calculated with Passenger Rail portion of Rail allocation allowing application to Transit (Bus ■. 3 &Vanpool)or Passenger Rail Funds to be allocated to Transit(Bus&Vanpool)or Passenger Rail r r r r LIIFELSBURG -. HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 77 r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan D. Fiscally Constrained Plan r Combining these estimates of available funds for each project category and the ranked lists of projects in each category, the projects that comprise the Fiscally Constrained Plan have been identified. Referring again to Tables V-1 through V-7, these projects are designated by darker shading. The fiscally constrained projects are also illustrated on Figures VI-1 through VI-4. Figure VI-5 provides a summary of 2025 Fiscally Constrained Plan projects. r T5M !• 525.1 Bike/ Pedestrian TDM 534.9 $39.2 Transit €4; Highway/HOV 330 1122.5 � 5330.2 Passenger Rail 530.0 Rail Crossing $20.3 Total Available Funds-5606.3 Million Figure VI-5 2025 Fiscally Constrained Plan Summary r r T 1 r r r r ' FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 78 \....._.........taehe t Douglas Rd, CR 54 a ^ P 287 ° 11 1 *'d•. •� CL hTERRY 1 \ .! cn `•• os '—^ LAKE / m-��drCR 54G a —.. '.._..�....1.._• 1 CR52 e \\J. - LONG l• (�• River .:4✓ POND\ , Country Club Dr. \ l �r (�' LI �36 Mountain View Dr O " CR50 LQIDENMEIER ') 75 L�Es u+ cb o (� Hi Drys Conifer St. ••1r..1 I U in 9� ` �• '�'51 ' • l r ` � �rI \ Vine Dr. y re. f v Vine Dr. .. CR 48 �, � r•f L. G$ uckinpbem St� _�'� —. ti �� CR46 4.-1 .IL.r LaPorte Ave. I� �; i 1„J BNRR �' L. I Mountain Ave. li ,it 76 G��'4 \' m _ Mulberry St ,` - .m 77 14 �\ O r ro- I ' Laurel '1Aie 2•ryr\Th S. I Elizabeth St. - _ �� __ HORSE OTH1 1 Lake Sc t- `) 1 I 1�" I CR 44 Prospect Rd. -4Ur% 1 RES. /l ., 1 t L. • 11 CR 44 ,* �� m ir100 �. `• ! '� ...-so y 75 C StuartSt. PG' Ilei.� -1 .nP ri �"� •� CO CR 42 h U Dr k;Rd. )' CC a rm ..T \ G`I v rt \ �I N Ti42r P • • CR 40 Horsetooth Rd. CR 40 WARREN I • �� LAKE / l•� �_..Jy noutman j52'' •L._.•\ U `I CR 38E I Pkwy. I R Harmony Rd -• 1--.. h='44 66 5i_s 7 I 84 • 84 . I 166 I' - ;/v, •..._. _.r CR 36 cc N E CR 34 Z. L Trilby Rd. _,� � .. I jFOSSRESIL REEK I i __E I I 1 CR 32 • l CR 32 Jo a 01 a a h CC U N U 287 U U cc cc 1 Th. ' CR 30 U U LEGEND Additional Projects = Highway Projects Travel Demand Management = Bike / Ped Projects TDM-8 Fort Collins Transportation Demand Management milmi = Rail Projects Transportation System Management TSM-11 Advanced Traffic Management System in Fort Collins X = Project Designation TSM-12 Fort Collins Traffic Operations Facility Figure VI-1 FELSBURGR� Fiscally Constrained Plan plil H O L T X North Front Range ULLEVIG L E V I G 71-an�°ortalio6 Air Quality in Fort Collins Area Planning Council 00-135 6/1/01 Additional Projects Travel Demand Management r 392 TDM-7 Less Taxing Commuter Benefits in Weld County ` 0- on N ET 3 pc Transportation System Management 3 ; �\ U 2 g TSM-3 Greeley Traffic Operations Center TSM-4 Variable Message Signs in Greeley W WCR55 ) WCR 66 TSM-5 Closed Circuit Video Monitoring Station in Greeley 3 c N U WCR 64 O St. 3 Riverc '4.. —_lh C9F •.I `/ ` - WCR 82 FSt.. 9-'- R Pa% 25 L.. WCR fit 1 I 2nd Si. • . f 4mst JI e .� w _ 4th St Sm st. goo" a was 4--" 11—"I •�•` 7th St 9th St. r' :� •-N 1L. ' , c�,� -_ `� 263 L _ 3 9>tty -I?I• _lP__ TI.P.4 -- '•"� I BWine88 T P _ r3 , ••—ti r P tam sr.rL..1 .. •� 3u :ssm st e e 3.23• 45nsr. m L. — 4' g 98th sr 37 in m V} tomsr.• c N _54; s 8 3 N ey ^ J1 -� sr r 20th St a cc 7-1 o I ' •I . ►�. �,• r..l c �`R. ■ 51 4th SG WCR 58.5 1..� t J y— 4r st z. r. L..—. ) .—..-1 I- w ii.. 28th St. >, ty ^' 8 34 YPass— I --! �• _..I 7 et Blass 29th Stir— 38th St tiYltali,. 211 ICI U U L. 26� - ' 3 r I 32nd St. ff / Q L..—..—..—.1 3 r- r4 DI , 34th St �� WCR 54 •r-- - J NI N 37th St. I-- --i EVANS 1 C:. j LEGEND IA J WCR52 = Highway Projects J?"� swww = Bike/Ped Projects - = Rail Projects X = Project Designation Figure VI-2 piFELSBURG Fiscally Constrained Plan CH O LT & ,"ohm a,o°fAtr Quality ULLEVIG Planning Council in the Greeley Area 00-135 6/1/01 ct ' fa W. {287j cel Additional Projects ¢ - a � U U m DDrvATx, CR 30 Transportation System Management ••�••—••—. CAFE ' r• — r—' 1 •� •� TSM-13 Loveland ITS Project (N ..I N./— •.!C��•� U •• Ft Collins-Loveland•• . I ! s11'- Municipal Airport . 59 Uhi I 57th Street Earnert Rd. I LEGEND •� / BOYD I = Highway Projects R Q • "�i HORSESHOE CAKE --� LAIC c. ; �s lBike/ P1dProjects 3 ~ W $I Th. : 6 \ cRzs r..�; I • ..— Rail Projectsj..1± m ( „_r ) ,• Crossroads Blvd. , X = Project Designation " J� —••—••_ _ 1 L. ��_�• CR 24E •` .._.._.._.._. 7th'ST : . P •. •� 9 \. 0 � C .. p 29th Street `-.:14 ,j _, chi ca z. C C 13//�, 1 \)1 EQ\kJAU m I I ./•• Q23N ....."Pie, L� I • \ yp C�.1 ..j Jr '� IOCE c l s SC 4� ai GA O O \y [ I I:$FJdSON� I,OVELAND N 16th St`"'23' g �•. I 'e eroa.•/` L 4___J TTiTö . t �.•— 25- 8th Sr. 7th St Q •-Th`'• • C�20 —y 1st St J �� / ht)i \• r"�I Ili Crl BOEDECKER 8 I \ • f• Thompson c N or I w �: LRY RES. er :i,•—,• 14th St1•'YCR18 �Zct . / —.._ UCR 16EN I u 18th St. .. „— . ,t, 5 cc CR16 J CR16 i CR16 �— 287. rt it cc U i U U Figure VI-3 4 FELSBURG Fiscally Constrained Plan �� ULLE & NunningC a in Loveland Area 'Ihvnspartnllon 6 Alr Quality U L L E V I G Planning Council 00-135 5/9/01 I LCR64 N. w WCR100 287 elfin :'n• it \ v e Additional Projects LCR62 3 3 WCR 98 Nu/�n 2M CO v CC CC CC J LCR60 3 3 3 3 3 WCR 96 Highway m - 1y H-64 Regional Park and Ride Lot Pool I1- 14 4 t 25 LCR58 ¢ a^ N CC cr " WCR 94 H-65 Signal Pool - Various Locations Region Wide '° • LCR56 U 3 3 3 85 WCR92 Transit i' 3 \ T-106 NFR SMART Trips Regional Vanpool Extpansion l-�"; cc, \ _ WCR 90 • LC,RsIa� r p;:rce Travel Demand Management Ix � li _ ^ is L 52 Nt WCR 88 TDM-1 SMART Trips Regional Travel Demand Z \ WCR86 Management Program (Existing) V 1 LCR 50 "1 3 ._ S \ TDM-7 Less Taxing Commuter Benefits in Weld County WCR 84 Transportation System Management A It\\ to TSM-t Region-Wide Planning Studies ' t 14 1\}� WCR SO TSM-2 Region-Wide/ Intelligent Transportation ( Lc 44 System Project Fort e a •19.n J 25 WCR 78 HORS x Ca L4 g nw+N,T1I m M1 n \ CR 76 a ! LC-.. " . --','<'..; WRit ' W \ Et ton CR 74 e, ev.� an CR72 LEGEND P R36 oQ .° _ , +4'H'' = Highway Projects ill. It o � • WCR 70 = Bike / Ped Projects n. — 392 ._�• 392 wN.¢ 287 1 LCR3OE 'II Windsor � '10, WCR66 = Rail Projects tai cc-4 Ci �� a �_ AA cRsa �— X = Project Designation w N6 tr-U 'Sx 6` ' !___ l r VI° River �7.�j' L 37 57 veland . :� w G . ■ \- Th m _ 34 �' **it,�� ° �1 •�� ■ � Greele as� rcass 1 r. .., .. - 1 � /�.. LCR18 �3�� Ev. �`L4 1 WCR54 ■ a ey c 18E LCRI 402' r.'■LCRi6 4.•ev 2 J _, ■ 111�3/ WCR 52 oeRe' e , N !!�'� in in pm 2 LCR 14 is I$ '� �J - I Y- i �� rt 2 ¢ R rt rt LL LCR 12 � lutst'�j alle Res.( 3 3 3 3 3 3 LAKE Q ��..�! JO . �' m .° ') ■r . o_ o_ WCR 46 • wru x LCR10 >. ,_17_, V U Rivcr LCR8 �.. �� cc cc -- ' N V 3 3 0 Q WCR44 N. cc t• 56 ume - 256 ,y N. U U U cv n LCR6 �^ d S ct �■� ��'� U ,(r ;'' 3 3 WCR 42 -4 Z U m U .n,i U s 'Ciic S,§ ■ 3 m WCR40 I _ 3 3 25 t r oCC 3 Q.^ 3 .t: N 60 iI3 (93 3 WCR38 LARIMERCOUNTY , - __ BOULDER NT��S COU ' ----287 U 3 r 3 3 3 85 3 3 3 Figure V14 P . FELSBURG Fiscally Constrained Plan C' H O LT & North FYonl e ULLEVIG Danning°onnell "°'"" in North Front Range Region Planning Connell 00-135 6/1/01 2025 Regional Transportation Plan E. Other CDOT Programs The prioritized list of projects presented in Tables V-1 through V-7 have been financially constrained to coincide with the combined total funding from federal, state, and local sources as enumerated earlier. In addition to these program categories, there are a number of other funding programs that will provide for the implementation of various projects that are selected through processes that are conducted by either CDOT or the Federal Department of Transportation. Through the general descriptions of programs listed below, this plan supports the inclusion of projects in upcoming versions of the North Front Range Transportation Improvement Program and the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program selected from these programs by processes involving statewide competition, program-specific applications, or by CDOT Region 4: • CDOT Surface Treatment Program - The CDOT Surface Treatment Program uses a process of identifying the remaining service life of the state highway system to determine where the surface treatment funding should be used in meeting the Transportation .- Commissions goals. The Transportation Commission has set an objective of having 60% of the state highway system rated as good or fair. • CDOT Bridge Program -The CDOT Bridge Program uses a process of identifying the condition of every bridge on the highway system to determine where bridge funding should be used. The Transportation Commission has set a goal to meet 100% of structural, functional, and maintenance needs of the structures on the state highway system. • CDOT Rest Area Program - The CDOT Rest Area Program identified current rest areas that needed to be replaced, reconstructed, and maintained to meet the Transportation Commission's goals for the program. Funding for construction and replacement of rest areas will sunset in Fiscal Year 2004 when prioritized projects are expected to be completed. • CDOT Safety Program - The CDOT Safety Program is aimed at meeting the Transportation Commission's goal to reduce motor vehicle crashes, injuries, and fatalities on the state highway system. In addition, safety program objectives for sign replacement and roadway striping have been established. • CDOT Maintenance Program -The CDOT Maintenance Program uses a process of grading maintenance levels of service on the state highway system. The Transportation Commission has established specific grade levels as objectives for the various activities associated with the maintenance program. r pi FELSBURG d HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 83 2025 Regional Transportation Plan Pm. • CDOT Operations Program -The CDOT Operations Program addresses the variety of administrative functions enabling CDOT to deliver its construction and maintenance programs. These include general support activities such as procurement services and human resource management, as well as program support activities such as transportation planning and roadway design. • • CDOT Transportation Enhancement Program - Starting with ISTEA, and continuing with the TEA-21, 10% of Surface Transportation Program funds are set aside for transportation enhancements. Transportation enhancements include facilities for bicycles and pedestrians, scenic or historic highway programs, landscaping, historic transportation building preservation, preservation of abandoned railway corridors, mitigation of water pollution due to highway runoff, and others. The CDOT Regions are responsible for the administration of this program, working with their Regional Planning Commissions. (Please note that Enhancement Program funds have been included in NFR RTP's assumed total revenues but only bike/pedestrian projects have been scored/ranked, etc.) In addition to these programs, federal discretionary grant programs such as the Recreational Trails Program, the Transportation and Community and System Preservation Program, Access to Jobs/Reverse Commute Program, and various Federal Transit Administration discretionary grant programs can provide additional funding for specific transportation projects and purposes. Program and grant applications are to coordinate with their regional planning commissions or metropolitan planning organizations to ensure consistency with regional transportation plans and programs. Similarly, notification of CDOT is necessary to facilitate coordination between regional and statewide plans and programs. Consistency at the regional plan and Transportation Improvement Programs (TIP) level would be considered consistent with the statewide transportation plan, and enables the projects awarded grants under the discretionary programs to be interpreted as eligible for inclusion in the STIP. r r r 1 . 1 . �^ /' FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 84 .- 2025 Regional Transportation Plan VII. SHORT-RANGE FISCALLY CONSTRAINED PLAN r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan VII. SHORT-RANGE FISCALLY CONSTRAINED PLAN This section provides descriptions of two short-range regional transportation planning elements. A. Short-Range Transit Element This section presents the Short-Range Transit Element of the North Front Range Regional Transit Plan that has been prepared by the NFRT &AQPC. The long-range elements of the .. Regional Transit Plan have been integrated into the preceding section of this RTP. The short- range element includes the projects to be implemented over the next six years. The major assumptions used in developing revenue and cost projections are sources currently used by the transit agencies or to be realized over the short planning horizon. The Short-Range Transit Element is the basis for operational plans for each transit provider within the North Front Range Region. Each operator is responsible for developing their own detailed operational plans to implement the Short-Range Transit Element. The Short-Range Transit Element is used by the Colorado Department of Transportation in the evaluation of transit grant applications. Service Plan— Fort Collins— Transfort The City of Fort Collins is completing a Strategic Operating Plan for the short-term planning period, as well as a long-range bus system design goal for year 2010. As of April 2001, four consecutive scenarios have been developed to reach the 2010 goal. Scenario 1 provides simple modifications to the existing service, and Scenario 2 adds the Mason Street Corridor project. Scenario 3 begins the transition to a productive grid design by providing a more extensive redesign of the system based on longer-term service improvements. The improvements position Transfort for continuing growth in Fort Collins. Thus, Scenario 3 is a foundation for the preferred system, and Scenario 4 will require a significant budget increase. A realistic option for the next six years is to look at Scenario 1 and progress to Scenario 2. These scenarios are shown in Figures VII-1 and VII-2, on the following pages. The maps are taken from the Nelson\Nygaard Draft Executive Summary. r- Table VII-1 presents the Transfort fiscally-constrained service plan for the next six years. The detailed financial plan will be available in the Strategic Operating Plan when the plan is finished and should be referred to for specific project funding details. To date, the information was not available. r P FELSBURG r" (4HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 85 SI IS Pm w-4*I—. I_ 4 Iwo ,... „c i L. 1 =. 14• ' Q.M. O , , 1 1 . rs 1 inks, t. g rH,'I a "MrMOO 'Mn -.. ? �. IN .° t iww Cal.•+ II Womowl R Ws r— ora p T !I P.4 elk .u_ raw p y i e"} le i ‘84.`SP I W Rua, Vimw .. !Tolland t;f min key Ww I U- MWi RDAs T imrl Cent (q MO*Worms) — 20— a4 Rests [sty NU n — ]0Mnis. I mr.-.Ire..._.__ MYnY ,{�� ---. FW U'II Al}�� 'e .0 OS IM. JNl .uu. i . M. Figure VII-1 piFELSBURG Fort Collins Transfort CI H O L T & hansporrtaORnea Quality ULLFVIO Planning Council Sceneraio 1: Minimal Redisign 00-155 6/1/01 MN PM WA . Y 4 Mr tl o.. Vt Jill • } Jill .c M. Alt Iia_ s I t Ovate a n Ma. o IT r. CWIC • r• L.AYw '`5 4M o"--a ea ° ar.Mr •M/A.J- � r I S.C. I. . ITh Caw* a,M Yllnal ar c.rV I LVpYY 0 ma rImre �; faliamMal ..nu. 0 1 a% elM • M a,t a 40 I �.. 1,Ma.M.a Cons,Coln •••• N.FEC St? rim rnr r. I.— N Day Rain in Tr.na Gran (M Mddw haircut) - aDMYn. Malaga* Cary Rd la - a MM. !M,/.y. ..-.—. low_ 4wre�nM1u .... FWD* ,iC}�..� 'v ' 0.5 lnb Jfl ,..« IlIMPIIIIMMIS Figure VII-2 IIFELSBURG NorthFmntR Range Fort Collins Transfort ' H O L T & North Front tRanon Air Quality aULLEVIG Planning Council 5ceneraio 2: Minimal Redisign with Mason 00-135 6/1/01 r P" 2025 Regional Transportation Plan Service Plan — Greeley—The Bus �. The City of Greeley—The Bus Short-Range Transit Element is presented in Table VII-2. The table shows the overall fiscally-constrained expenses for The Bus and also the projected revenues for the system. The overall system costs for the next five years are approximately $2,500,000 each year. If more monies become available, The Bus has several expansion projects for the community of Greeley and the surrounding areas. Service Plan—Loveland— City of Loveland Transit The City of Loveland — COLT, Short-Range Transit Element is presented in Table VII-3. The table shows the overall fiscally-constrained expenses for COLT and also the projected revenues for the system. The principal shod-range elements identified by the City of Loveland include: • Increase citywide fixed-route service to 30-minute frequencies during peak hours, six days per week. • Increase the Foxtrot service and coordination with Transfort. • Restructure the Minibus service to a true ADA-defined paratransit service, instead of an age-based service. r The major factor for funding sources with the City of Loveland includes the availability of FTA Section 5307 monies in fiscal year 2003. This funding source will provide additional monies to the agency, but will still require a 50 percent local match. Therefore, the budget on the following page presents the major upgrade (more frequent service and longer hours) in service for fiscal year 2006. This allows the City of Loveland to plan for an increase in funding from their general fund or optimistically from a dedicated tax or impact fee from the increased development in the region. The North Front Range Regional Transit Plan provides a list of the Loveland preferred projects, which have been submitted for long-range planning purposes. These projects may be implemented for the transit agency if additional monies become available. Service Plan— Regional Services Projects included in the regional services portion of this fiscally-constrained Short-Range Transit Element are Foxtrot Service (Loveland to Fort Collins) and Regional Vanpool Service by Smart Trips. Table VII-4 provides the year-to-year budgetary information for the regional services. It must also be noted that numerous regional projects ranked very high among all the projects submitted for the North Front Range. These projects were not included in the fiscally- constrained short-range plan. However, it is a good chance that these projects may be implemented with additional monies available within the region. Three such examples of high scoring projects are: F-• FELSBURG Nu HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 88 r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan r Table VII-1 Short-Range Transit Element Transfort - Fort Collins r 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Continue Existing Services $ 5,893,010 $ 6,069,800 $ 6,251,894 $ 6,439,451 $ 6,632,635 $ 6,831,614 Replace Vehicles $888,308 $3,689,490 (7 med-sized buses&4 mini-buses) (14 mini-buses, 8 full coaches& 1 serv. veh.) Bus Facility Expansion $ 7,600,000 - Mason Street ROW preserv. $ 7,734,000 CSU Transit Center $ 3,258,000 Subtotal $ 6,781,318 $ 24,661,800 $ 6,251,894 $ 10,128,941 $ 6,632,635 $ 6,831,614 1. Other Regional Priorities - 2. Small Urban 3. Enhancement Funding data not available. 4. CMAQ 5. Strategic Projects — 6. Transit(Bus, Rail) Subtotal $ 6,781,318 $ 24,661,800 $ 6,251,894 $ 10,128,941 $ 6,632,635 $ 6,831,614 r NOTES: 1.Based on 2020 RTP allotment and expanded to 2025 at 3%per year. 2.Because program ends in 2004,used funds from TIP for 2002-2004. 3. Based on TIP 2002-2006,expanded at 3%per year. 4.Available only to the Fort Collins area&based on TIP 2002-2006,expanded at 3%per year. 5. Maximum estimate based on COOT sources,a podton of which may be expended on projects in the Upper Front Range RTP. r 6. Based on TIP 2002-2006,expanded at 3%per year,.except assume 2 times TIP funds for 3 out-of-ordinary capital projects (Fort Collins bus facility expansion,CSU transit center and Loveland maintenance facility). r I Table VII-2 r Short-Range Transit Element The Bus -Greeley 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Continue Existing Services $ 2,024,416 $ 2,105,000 $ 2,189,000 $ 2,277,000 $ 2,368,000 $ 2,463,000 Replace Vehicles $ 110,000 $ 17,000 $ 130,000 $ 45,000 $ - $ 635,000 Support Vehicle Main.Equip. $ - $ 80,000 $ - $ - $ 50,000 $ 20,000 Subtotal $ 2,134,416 $ 2,202,000 $ 2,319,000 $ 2,322,000 $ 2,418,000 $ 3,118,000 Fares $ 283,000 $ 297,000 $ 312,000 $ 328,000 $ 344,000 $ 361,000 Advertising $ 43,524 $ 45,000 $ 45,000 $ 45,000 $ 45,000 $ 45,000 City of Evans $ 80,250 $ 83,000 $ 86,000 $ 89,000 $ 93,000 $ 97,000 FTA Urban $ 922,000 $ 987,000 $ 1,026,480 $ 1,067,539 $ 1,110,241 $ 1,154,650 I - FTA Discretionary $ 88,000 $ - $ 104,000 $ - $ - $ 508,000 City of Greeley $ 717,642 $ 790,000 $ 745,600 $ 793,000 $ 826,000 $ 953,000 Subtotal $ 2,134,416 $ 2,202,000 $ 2,319,080 $ 2,322,539 $ 2,418,241 $ 3,118,650 Notes:Assumed 3%Inflation Rate&4%Personnel Cost Increase. r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan r Table VII-3 Short-Range Transit Element COLT-City of Loveland r 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Continue Existing Services $ 507,000 $ 560,300 $ 610,000 $ 737,000 $ 759,110 $ 781,883 $ 2,550,890 $ 2,627,417 Replace Vehicles $ 495,000 $ 200,000 $ 45,000 $ 150,000 Other Capital $ 4,625,000 Subtotal $ 507,000 $ 5,185,300 $ 1,105,000 $ 937,000 $ 3,355,000 $ 3,559,300 . r Fares $ 15,450 $ 29,150 $ 32,000 $ 35,000 $ 59,000 $ 65,000 Advertising $ 6,000 $ 12,000 $ 12,000 $ 13,200 $ 13,900 $ 14,600 City of Loveland $ 351,000 $ 1,304,500 $ 404,000 $ 408,500 $ 1,664,000 $ 1,734,650 FTA 5307- $ 96,000 $ 98,880 FTA 5307-Small Urban $ 701,000 $ 528,500 $ 1,691,000 $ 1,824,650 FTA 5313(70/30) $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000• $ 15,000 FTA 5309 $ 3,700,000 'PP" Medicaid $ 24,000 $ 26,000 $ 26,000 $ 26,000 $ 26,000 $ 26,000 Subtotal $ 507,450 $ 5,185,530 $ 1,190,000 $ 1,026,200 $ 3,468,900 $ 3,679,900 r- Notes:Assumed 3%Inflation Rate. r Table VII-4 ' Short-Range Transit Element r Regional Transit Services 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Continue Existing Services 1. Loveland to Fort Collins $ 162,000 $ 166,860 $ 171,866 $ 177,022 $ 182,332 $ 187,802 2. Regional Vanpool $ 461,000 $ 474,830 $ 489,075 $ 503,747 $ 518,860 $ 534,425 Replace Vehicles .M 1. Loveland to Fort Collins $ 125,000 $ 125,000 2.Regional Vanpool $ 295,000 $ 303,850 $ 312,966 $ 322,354 $ 332,025 $ 341,986 Subtotal $ 623,000 $ 641,690 $ 660,941 $ 680,769 $ 701,192 $ 722,228 CMAQ(2) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Transfort Revenues(2) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - City of Fort Collins(1 &2) $ - $ 110,500 $ 109,000 $ 112,270 $ 116,000 $ 119,480 Fares (1) $ 32,000 $ 32,960 $ 33,949 $ 34,967 $ 36,016 $ 37,097 • Foxtrot(FTA 5311)(1) $ 5,000 City of Loveland(1) $ 18,000 $ 45,000 $ 19,100 $ 19,673 $ 20,263 $ 20,871 FTA 5307(1) $ 83,430 $ 185,933 $ 88,511 $ 191,166 $ 93,901 carryover $ 33,000 $ 35,000 Subtotal $ 55,000 $ 271,890 $ 347,982 $ 288,421 $ 363,446 $ 306,349 Notes:(#)indicates the transit project funded. Assumed 3%Inflation Rate. • 2025 Regional Transportation Plan • Expansion of SmartTrips Regional Vanpool • Greeley to Denver Regional Transit Service • Fort Collins to Denver Regional Transit Service • Intercity Bus Feasibility Study In addition to the local planning efforts for regional service, an Intercity Bus Feasibility Study is currently underway. The purpose of the study is to determine if commuter bus service is feasible in the following travel corridors in the Front Range: 1) 1-25 south from Denver to Pueblo; 2) 1-25 north from Denver to Fort Collins/Greeley, including Highway 85 and the possible link from 1-25 to Highway 85, via Highway 34. The study will look at service needs between 2001 and 2008, including an evaluation of demand and service design as construction on 1-25 is underway. Service Plan— Larimer County(Rural Area) ^ Larimer County conducted a Transit Services Action Plan study to guide the county in the correct direction for transit in the future. Rural transit service is currently provided by the county under contract with BATS, SAINT, City of Loveland Transit, and TransFort. The recommendation from the Larimer County Transit Services Action Plan is for Larimer County to take on management of a "County Transit Program"—similar to the existing Weld County Program. Further details and implementation steps are available within the report. r The fiscally-constrained plan for rural Larimer County is presented in Table VII-5. Larimer County relies on the transit agencies to apply for the rural FTA grants. The fiscally-constrained plan assumes that Larimer County will implement the recommendations for the County Transit Program by 2003. The continuation of existing services includes: • COLT Tango Route and Mini Bus — rural areas • Transfort Dial-A-Ride • BATS • SAINT r Service Plan— Weld County(Rural Area) ^ The Weld County Transportation Program is a multi-faceted transportation service for rural Weld County, including special populations and the general public. It is an integrated service with a diversity of funding, including contracts, public grants, and private grants. r The fiscally-constrained plan for rural Weld County is presented in Table VII-6 and includes the funding for the continuation of existing services. r r ppFELSBURG r C4 HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 91 2025 Regional Transportation Plan r Table VII-5 Short-Range Transit Element Rural Larimer County r 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 ' Continue Existing Services $ 152,000 $ 156,560 $ 161,257 $ 166,095 $ 171,077 $ 176,210 Replace Vehicles $ 75,000 $ 75,000 $ 120,000 $ 120,000 $ 120,000 $ 120,000 Subtotal $ 227,000 $ 231,560 $ 281,257 $ 286,095 $ 291,077 $ 296,210 Fares $ 12,000 $ 12,360 IIM $ 13,506 RIM FTA 5311 $ 76,000 $ 78,280 $ 80,628 $ 83,047 $ 85,539 $ 88,105 FTA 5310 $ 60,000 $ 60,000 $ 96,000 $ 96,000 $ 96,000 $ 96,000 Local communities $ 70,000 collected by Latimer County -- Larimer Coun $ 9,000 $ 81,000 $ 92,000 $ 94,000 $ 96,000 $ 98,200 Subtotal $ 227,000 $ 231,640 $ 281,359 $ 286,160 $ 291,045 $ 296,216 .+ Notes:Assumed 3%Inflation Rate. r Table VII-6 Short-Range Transit Element Rural Weld County r 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Continue Existing Services $ 662,000 $ 681,860 $ 702,316 $ 723,385 $ 745,087 $ 767,439 Replace Vehicles $ 200,000 $ 206,000 $ 212,180 $ 218,545 $ 225,102 $ 231,855 Subtotal $ 862,000 $ 887,860 $ 914,496 $ 941,931 $ 970,189 $ 999,294 - .. FTA 5310 $ 64,000 $ 65,920 $ 67,898 $ 69,935 $ 72,033 $ 74,194 ►- CSBG $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Title MB $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - JTPA $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - TANF $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - '-- Head Start $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Migrant Program $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Supplemental Foods $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - „ Medicaid $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - School District $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other $ 99,823 $ 102,818 $ 105,902 $ 109,079 $ 112,352 $ 115,722 Subtotal $ 163,823 $ 168,738 $ 173,800 $ 179,014 $ 184,384 $ 189,916 iii- Notes:Assumed 3%Inflation Rate. r r r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan r B. Aviation Element The Short-Range Aviation Element consists of the Capital Improvement Programs of the two publicly funded airports in the region shown on Tables VII-7 and VII-8. In addition, both facilities plan to update their airport master plans in the next few years to define long-range improvement plans. Table VII-7 Fort Collins Municipal Airport Capital Improvement Program $kale!` tln₹uMd+sd '!. vear/jIrglec Federbt_,.: :' t,ocali, Needs Total 2001 Rehab T/way"B" Between 20,312 182,813 203,125 "Al"and ""A2" Construct Maintenance 62,500 62,500 125,000 ^ Building 2002 Install Hard Stands on Ramp 37,500 37,500 75,000 Slurry Seal and Paint South 25,000 100,000 125,000 r End of Main Ramp 2003 Sealcoat T/ways & Ramps I 83,375 I 90,000 I 173,375 2004 Crack, Seal, Fog Seal and 125,000 125,000 250,000 Paint R/way 15-33 2005 Master Plan Update I 37,500 I 37,500 I I 75,000 2006 Pave and Paint R/way 6-24 75,000 75,000 150,000 300,000 Total 6-Year Costs 445,875 547,812 332,813, 1,326,500 r r imFELSBURG trill HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 93 r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan I Table VII-8 Greeley-Weld County Airport Capital Improvement Program Yea'rlPtoject Federal L'cal Total 2001 Taxiway C * $1,660,000 $1,660,000 Infrastructure/Roads $400,000 $400,000 2002 Taxiway A Central $1,880,000 $1,880,000 Airport Master Plan $150,000 $150,000 Infrastructure $1,000,000 $1,000,000 2003 Runway 9/27 Rehab. $1,770,000 I I $1,770,000 2004 Aprons/Taxi Lanes Rehab. $1,110,000 $,110,000 Infrastructure $1,000,000 $1,000,000 2005 Security Project I $150,000 I I $150,000 2006 Runway 16/34 Overlay $3,300,000 $3,300,000 .. Total 6-Year Costs $10,020,000 $2,400,000 $12,420,000 * Taxiway C is the final phase of a multi-year 15 million dollar airport expansion project which included the construction of a new 10,000 foot primary runway and a new terminal building. r r r r , FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 94 2025 Regional Transportation Plan Vlll. AIR QUALITY CONFORMITY FINDING r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan VIII. AIR QUALITY CONFORMITY FINDING re IN PROGRESS r r r . FELSBURG .. C4 HOLT Si. ULLEVIG I G Page 95 2025 Regional Transportation Plan ~ IX. PLANNING PROCESS r 2025 Regional Transportation Plan r� IX. PLANNING PROCESS This section provides discussions of considerations that should be applied to future transportation planning activities that are undertaken by the NFR. A. Transportation Improvement Program Development Every two years, the region's six-year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is updated by the NFRT & AQPC. The TIP is the primary tool for allocating funds to implement projects identified in the RTP. The prioritization of projects in the RTP should continue to be used as a guide to development of the TIP. Three additional considerations have been suggested by planning process participants as ones that should be incorporated in the TIP development process. • Small Projects —There is a concern that in allocating funds through the TIP process, that one or two very high cost projects could use up all of the available funding for a significant period of time, thus delaying implementation of highly ranked smaller projects. It is recommended that special consideration be given to allocations to smaller projects in the development of TIP's. • Local Match —The amount of local funding committed to projects for which federal and state funds are sought should be considered in selecting projects for inclusion in TIP's. If local �. governments can commit to significant investments for local matching and overmatch funds, that should be factored into the TIP project selection criteria. Such a consideration can serve to optimize the benefits derived from federal and state funds, as well as creating incentives for local governments and private interests to invest in needed transportation improvements. r- • Project Phasing— For some large multi-phased projects, the ranking of different phases in the RTP may not be the most logical order in which the overall project should be implemented. For example, the utility of one phase may be dependent upon the implementation of another phase that has been ranked lower in the RTP prioritization process. These phasing considerations should be factored into the TIP development process to ensure the most logical phasing of multi-phased projects. rr B. Future Regional Transportation Planning Considerations The NFR updates its regional transportation plan on an approximate three-year cycle, and the plan development process is continually evolving. Based on the 2025 RTP process, a few observations have been made by plan participants relative to modifications to the process that should be considered for future RTP updates. r • Project Categories-The Rail project category has been defined to include both rail/highway crossing improvements and passenger rail projects. Since evaluation criteria and potential funding sources that are appropriate for these two types of rail projects are very different, it is recommended that Rail/Highway Crossing and Passenger Rail be separated into two project categories. ppFELSBURG i HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 96 r' 2025 Regional Transportation Plan r • Socio-Economic Forecasts -The socio-economic forecasting process used for the 2020 and 2025 RTP's was essentially a "bottom-up" approach, whereby individual jurisdictions were asked to provide forecasts for their own communities, and the accumulated individual forecasts were reviewed for reasonableness at the regional level. For future planning, the NFR should consider implementation of more of a "top-down" approach, whereby regional .. household and employment control totals would be established first, then growth would be allocated to individual communities based on a regional land use forecasting process. - C. Plan Amendment Process In the approximate three-year periods between RTP updates, there may be a need to amend �— the plan. Situations that would spur interim amendments may include new projects or substantially modified project descriptions that emerge from completion of a regional or local study or the availability of financial resources that were not anticipated in the RTP process. The NFRT & AQPC will develop a standard form to be submitted by a member jurisdiction wishing to request an amendment. Information should be submitted outlining the specific . amendment request, the reason that the amendment is needed, and a clear explanation of the reason the amendment is required prior to development of the next scheduled RTP update. NFRT & AQPC staff will review the request and determine whether the request should be processed as an administrative planning modification or as a formal plan amendment. In the cases of administrative planning modifications, NFRT &AQPC staff would prepare a recommendation for incorporating the modification in the regional transportation planning process. The recommendation would be presented to the TAC for concurrence. The general criterion for administrative planning modifications would be a change in the scope of a project that is contained in the current RTP that would not substantially impact the ability to fund the fiscally constrained RTP with identified resources. Cost increases of the magnitude of one percent of the regional estimate of available resources might be viewed as a reasonable upper limit for administrative planning modification. If a local government were to request that a project be removed from the RTP, that could be handled as an administrative planning modification. Amendment requests that would either add a new project to the RTP or project modification of a magnitude greater than that outlined for an administrative planning modification would be treated as a formal plan amendment. In these cases, the Council would be required to consider and adopt the modification as an amendment to the RTP. I— r r FELSBURG +.. (4HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 97 2025 Regional Transportation Plan APPENDIX A GLOSSARY OF TERMS r r r r PON r r pFELSBURG a ' HOLT Si. ULLEVIG 2025 Regional Transportation Plan GLOSSARY OF TERMS CDOT Colorado Department of Transportation Council NFRT & AQPC DRCOG Denver Regional Council of Governments HOV High Occupancy Vehicle, any vehicle carrying two or more passengers ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, requiring states to develop a Statewide Transportation Plan and a Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) identifying short-term project needs and priorities. LOS Level of Service (a measure of roadway congestion ranging from LOS A, free-flow traffic conditions, to LOS F, a breakdown in traffic flow). MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization is the agency designated by the Governor to administer the federally required transportation planning process in a metropolitan area. An MPO must be in place in every urbanized area over 50,000 population. The MPO is responsible for the 20-year long range plan and the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The MPO is the coordinating agency for grants, billings and policy- .. making for transportation. NFR North Front Range, one of 15 statewide planning regions. r NFR TAFS North Front Range Transportation Alternatives Feasibility Study, Phase 1, as conducted concurrent with this study, analyzing potential options for long range transportation between the Denver metro area and the NFR. NFRT & AQPC North Front Range Transportation and Air Quality Planning Council, the MPO for the study area. NHS National Highway System, including the Interstate System and major, connecting arterial roadways. r RTP Regional Transportation Plan SOV Single Occupant Vehicle STIP Statewide Transportation Improvement Program is developed by CDOT, identifying short-term project needs and priorities. Colorado has established a 6-year STIP. FELSBURG ^ r4 HOLT & ULLEVIG 2025 Regional Transportation Plan TAC Technical Advisory Committee, responsible for technical tasks, review of consultant work, and making recommendations to the Council. Pm TAZ Transportation Analysis Zone, used for land use projections and modeling purposes. TDM Transportation Demand Management, strategies attempting to reduce single occupant vehicle trips by encouraging alternate modes of high occupant transportation. $0 TIP Transportation Improvement Program, a multi-year program of transportation projects (including highway and transit) on the Federal aid system, which addresses the goals of the long-range plans and lists priority projects and activities for the region. TRP Transportation Planning Region. 15 TRPs have been established in Colorado. UFR Upper Front Range, planning region surrounding the NFR including the rural portions of Larimer and Weld Counties, and all of Morgan County. VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled. The total distance traveled, in miles, by all motor vehicles of a specific group in a given area during a given time period. r P0 r .. .. ^ ^ ' FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG 2025 Regional Transportation Plan APPENDIX B SUMMARY OF PUBLIC OPEN HOUSES r r r r r r r r r pm FELSBURG i HOLT & ULLEVIG 2025 Regional Transportation Plan Open House Comments (September 2000) The following is a list of comments gathered at the first set of open houses for the 2025 Update of the NFR Regional Transportation Plan. The Open Houses were held in September at the Greeley Mall and the Foothills Fashion Mall in Fort Collins. Both open houses were held on a Saturday, and then displays were left for people to view and make additional comments into the following week. Items with an `*' were written on a comment sheet and individuals provided a name and address, allowing for a written response. The remaining comments were made on"Post—It Notes" and placed on the display maps showing: the Region, Loveland Area, Greeley Area and Fort Collins Area. Bold type indicates specific locations. #s in ()s reflect number of similar comments. r REGIONAL MAP '-• Bicycles/Pedestrians • Separate bikes from autos (2); and not just with a painted line on the street. • Provide more bike paths to places we need to go—like Harmony stores. Highway ,. • Windsor Interchange at CR 32 needs to be widened • Focus on improving State Highway 60 East to 4 lanes • 6 lane I-25 from Wyoming border to New Mexico • Make US 287 limited access all the way from Wyoming to US 36 • Good to have South Windsor bypass Transit • Need regional bus service including Windsor • Commuter rail can't come too soon/ Get funding in place. Purchase right-of way while still available. • I would like to see bus service for summer mornings, afternoon, and an evening final bus—For kids between small community and swimming, library stop, mall, downtown rec. center, Boy's Club. Specific kid oriented buses. Serving: Pierce,Ault, Eaton, Greeley and Nunn* r • I-25: Denver to Fort Collins: We need to find a way to get people back and forth without adding more lanes to I-25! More lanes for more cars is not a solution,we have to have a user-friendly alternative that works! (Long time native knows time prior to I-25)* • We need public transportation linking the cities along the Front Range. We came to Fort Collins from Golden this weekend for a convention. We only have 1 car and were not able to come at the same time. We were appalled to find there was no alternative [regional] transportation.* • Transportation system combined with all 3 communities [unspecified - Greeley, Fort Collins, and Loveland ?]. NFR can do it! * • Transit service between Greeley and Fort Collins, with bike racks Rail • Commuter rail can't come too soon • Rail connection to Denver, Pueblo to Cheyenne • Rail good because quick, but anything would be good r • Windsor rail—support it r Page 1 of 6 September, 2000 Open House Comments For 2025 RTP Update r LOVELAND MAP General Comments • Transportation between Greeley and Fort Collins from Loveland • Quit putting up lights at every intersection. Make driver be responsible—look • Where are go-peds [motorized scooters] in the future?Does NFR want to defend as another mode of transportation? Chief in Windsor using State codes • Mass transit fails because it's cheaper and more convenient to drive a car • Commuter rail and regional bus service would be a big benefit for commuters and for recreational purposes to Denver* U- Bicycle/Pedestrians • Longer pedestrian walk signals on 37« and 43`d and Taft Highways • Address safety issues at Highway 402 and CR 13C • Taft& Wilson must become major(4 lane?) arteries from north Fort Collins to US 287 in Berthoud Transit • Need a bus N/S on Taft • More frequent &consistent bus system in Loveland • Sunday transit to Fort Collins • I work in Boulder and live in Loveland and am looking for a method of public transportation to work. I feel that there are many commuters that would benefit from this as well. Any information would be appreciated. * Rail • A grade separated crossing for the railroad tracks east of I-25 on US 34. The trains run during rush hours, with considerable traffic backup * r r Page 2 of 6 September, 2000 Open House Comments For 2025 RTP Update GREELEY MAP General Comments • Require transportation impact fees (& adequate public facility standards) of all entities that benefit from projects/ improvements funded through the MPO (e.g., Highway 392) Bicycle/Pedestrian • Poudre Trail continuous from Greeley to Fort Collins • Bikeway/trail maintenance during winter season with 3 communities • I support Cache La Poudre bike path improvements r. Highway • State Highway 263 from Hwy 85 bypass to the Greeley-Weld County Airport should continue to be �- a priority. As the airport continues to grow—heavier use of the highway will continue to reduce capacity. This coupled with slow moving agricultural equipment continues to create traffic safety problems. * • Fix new overpass for east bound traffic to new State Farm building • Focus on Two Rivers Parkway complete to 4-lane • Complete Business 34 four-lane from 47th to US 34 /257 • 37th St. add 1 lane for motor vehicles Transit • Don't change Hillside bus stop • 20`h St. and north along 35th Avenue—bus service not adequate • Need bus service from Greeley to LaSalle,Eaton • Within a year the Greeley Hewlett Packard (HP) site will be relocated to Harmony Road in Fort Collins. Many HP people who live in Greeley would like transportation in the form of bus or van transportation from Greeley to Ft. Collins and back. I also would like to see city bus service from Greeley to the HP Greeley site. * • Person lives near Greeley Mall—would like to see transit alternative to Fort Collins—Bus or at least Para transit—vans for disabled. Need a van to Fort Collins instead of 2 to Greeley. * • Would like to see Greeley—Fort Collins Bus Service(2) • Have public transportation from Greeley to the Denver Airport • I want a commuter bus/train from Greeley to Fort Collins and back. I would consider carpooling. • Target certain markets (riders) • Good job with Para transit • Let's create a Regional Bus System! Greeley to Loveland to Ft. Collins—to Windsor/Eaton or where ever! • We would like to see more transportation between the rural areas and the metro areas. • Summer bus service between small towns (Eaton, Ault) and Greeley for kid activities • Senior services for Greeley, more ADA service, not disabled and low-income only Rail • Train from Greeley to Denver(2) • Train spur from Greeley to I-25 r` Page 3 of 6 September, 2000 Open House Comments For 2025 RTP Update FORT COLLINS MAP General Comments • Are we looking at L.A. without the freeways? • Speed limit signs are needed after major intersections (Placed on map on Mulberry west of I-25) • Traffic on Riverside from Highway 14 to Prospect • When improvements are underway for US 287 from N. College to bypass, keep truck traffic out of residential areas. • We need a transportation route to Denver in the future • It won't work unless it's affordable! —Too much traffic, more roads, less sidewalks .— • Anticipate growth related issues better while land is still available • The city is growing so fast! We need to build more walkways,nature paths,bike routes, skating, boards, and pet routes so people can get out of their vehicles and commute without cars. Pollution from cars has engulfed Houston, LA,Mexico City. Are we heading in the same direction? Look at Denver's pollution cloud. More people, more cars, more pollution. Planning now can stop this. ►� Bicycle/Pedestrian • Bike trail west of CR 46 to Horsetooth Reservoir—look at connection • Bike trail S of CR 46 to CR 44—blocked now—acquire property • Bike Trail N/S on Timberline near Horsetooth • Look at Portland's yellow bike program • A bike path along US 287 for us skaters/bikers • If you separate bikes from autos, I can go places safely with my children—otherwise I take my van! Use the European model of wide sidewalks divided for bike and pedestrian. • Fort Collins has terrific bikeways. Maintain and expand these! • I am glad to see that Fort Collins is planning ahead for its transportation needs. Bicycle projects are of great interest since I bicycle nearly everywhere I go (even though I have a car.) The best and easiest thing that Fort Collins could do right now to help bicycle commuters is reduce its use of unnecessary or excessive traffic control devices. These include speed bumps, "raised crosswalks," 4-way stop signs when only 2-way stop signs are necessary, and rumble strips that infringe on bike lanes. * .. • More money and time should be spent on bike trails Highways • The City of Ft. Collins has no $ to improve Vine/Timberline. Where will the dollars come from? • Transportation plan needed north of Douglas Rd. (CR 54) as developments are coming on line in that area. Safety issues at Highway 1 and Douglas Rd. need to be addressed. • Prospect/I-25 interchange needs upgrade with possible new high school & shopping center • I-25 /Prospect development impacts to interchange—preserve ROW (right-of-way) • Connect Battlecreek and Keenland ASAP (I sat through 6 left turn lights at Timberline and Harmony) • Have north south and east west highways in Fort Collins with NO lights • Do Harmony—I-25 interchange correctly. Do it like Highway 14—1-25 • E/W signal timing needs improvement in south area • Signals need to be timed • The light at Constitution and Drake is way too long. Please shorten time. .. • Miserable traffic light timing on Harmony (in particular around College crossing) • If there is a computer program timing the lights in Fort Collins, look at updating it to handle 2000+ traffic needs—it obviously is outdated when it takes 10 minutes to go '/o mile!* • Need more routes from north of Fort Collins into and thru downtown—maybe a bypass to the west * Page 4 of 6 September, 2000 Open House Comments For 2025 RTP Update r- FORT COLLINS MAP (Continued) • The widening of Timberline Road between Prospect and Horsetooth needs to be addressed before Rigden Farm is built (1,000 houses) and the proposed development of the northwest side of the intersection of Timberline & Drake will be approximately 700 homes. How will I ever get out of Parkwood East (Eastwood Drive)? * • With raised speed limit on Drake to 40 mph, most drivers now drive 50 mph making a left turn onto Drake from Eastwood Drive (or Brookwood Drive) a really dangerous turn. * Transit • Better direct bus routes (and more frequent!) from southeast(Timberline &Harmony) into center axis or downtown. The time it takes to get downtown is the problem. It's quicker to ride my bike 5-7 miles • More frequent bus service overall and timed well with Mason Street corridor • Need later hours of service on main routes not just CSU routes! ,. • Need bus service between Ft. Collins center&Mulberry (I-25 employment area) • Good transit feeder service to support Mason St. (frequent) • Bus Route from Fort Collins to Loveland on Taft/ Shields • Good transit feeder service to support Mason Street [Corridor] (frequent) • We need a bus route that goes from Loveland/Fort Collins to Boulder • Start routes for Transfort a bit earlier in the day for Routes 4 and 9 * Rail • Need a few RR overpasses—especially for emergency access when long train is passing • TRAIN • Use existing RR for trolley service N-S on College, parallel with bike paths down to Loveland • Fast train -* Boulder 4 Denver 4 airport • Please work on light rail from Fort Collins to Denver(2) • Move railroad east of town, too loud, too dangerous .. • Mass transit (especially trains) great idea! Europe is a fine example. • If they can do it(trains in Europe)—It works for them—It will work for us • Rail system from Fort Collins to Denver and including Loveland and Longmont Mason Street Corridor • I really like the Mason Street Corridor ^ • Great idea—Mason St. Rail • Bullet cars(Electric for use at either end) Re-charge en-route. • Per voters' wishes,keep vehicles out of Mason St. Corridor south of Prospect. Plan and encourage alternative transportation modes. • Keep traffic on Mason (College is jammed) or provide another N/S road. Roundabout • Don't like the roundabout—too confusing—not safe—too much traffic • Lemay and Mulberry Roundabout—a short-term solution that will cost taxpayers for replacement. • Look at stop light near roundabout—take out to make it work! (Note placed east of intersection on Mulberry) • No to the Mulberry roundabout(2) • If Fort Collins wants to try a roundabout,why not pick a less heavy intersection to try? • Yes to Roundabout(Mulberry) (2). Who wants to stand in line at that intersection for 45 minutes? I would rather learn to maneuver this than waste time due to fear. Great job,well researched. Page 5 of 6 September, 2000 Open House Comments For 2025 RTP Update r FORT COLLINS MAP (Continued) Truck Bypass • Vine Drive should be eliminated as bypass and no new interchange • Highway planning is of less interest to me,but still important. I think that Vine Street should be expanded into a truck bypass. The vocal minority opposed to the project can be ignored. I also think the roundabout for Mulberry and Lemay is silly. * r Om r- Pa F— Page 6 of 6 September, 2000 Open House Comments For 2025 RTP Update 2025 Regional Transportation Plan Open House Comments (January 2001) The following is a list of comments gathered from the second set of open houses for the 2025 Update of the NFR Regional Transportation Plan. The open houses were held in January at the Greeley Mall, the Multi- Purpose Room at the Loveland Library and the Foothills Fashion Mall in Fort Collins. The open houses were held on a Saturday, and then displays were left for people to view and make additional comments into the following week. The comments with an '*' individuals provided a name and address, allowing for a written response or asking to be added to the mailing list. Comments are generally identified by open house locations and by region. Specific projects identified by a code are briefly identified. #s in ()s reflect number of similar comments. Summary: Eighty-six comment sheets were returned with one to many comments on each sheet. There were: # Interest area 74 Highway related suggestions and comments 41 In support of rail from Greeley/Fort Collins/Loveland to Denver 39 Supporting transit from Greeley/Fort Collins/Loveland to Denver 50 In support of bike and pedestrian paths in the North Front Range GREELEY I' Unlisted but important comments: .. • Maybe doing something right out in front of the mall on 23rd Ave. —too congested • Speed humps on 50th Ave in area 20th St. south to US 34. (Has been part of meeting last few years with no results.) * �- • Bus service is lousy. Travel from mall area to AT & T cable (8th & 16th or W 10th near 38th Ave. [?]) took from 10 a.m. to 2:45 p.m. and 4 transfers • More ped and bike paths—within the city. This would be helpful if the paths were continuous throughout Greeley in town to allow cyclists safe routes in town. * • There are so many cars traveling to Denver M—F (I recognize so many constant commuters.) Couldn't we expedite a transit system? I'm sure there would be large ridership.* • Continuing the Poudre Trail from Harmony Rd/I-25 to Windsor * • Headways must be less than or close to what it would take for auto travel or we will ever get people out of their cars. Time is a premium for everyone—We (everyone, every city)will have to give a little to get a lot [less] traffic [less] air pollution [more] Quality of Life* Bicycle/Pedestrian (Most important) • The Ped/Bike path in Greeley(2) Highway(Most important) • H-219 -US 34 Bypass grade separated interchange at 35th Ave. because it's growing more and more & lots of heavy traffic there. r Transit(Most important) • #22 Transit [T-22—Greeley to Denver Regional Transit Service (New)] from Greeley to Denver. I need to make frequent medical appointments in Denver and can't drive. * • Bus—commuter to Denver from Greeley * • T - 102 -VanGo Medical/clinic Shuttle Service in Greeley/Evans * r Page 1 of 6 January, 2001 Open House Comments For 2025 RTP Update r GREELEY (continued) Rail(Most important) • Rail/Public Transportation along I-25 connecting front range cities to Denver and beyond, preferably Cheyenne to Pueblo * LOVELAND Unlisted but important projects: • Resurface north end of Madison over to Monroe • It would be helpful to have a Loveland bus route that went E/W on 1St Street. • The e/w Intersection at 57th and US 287 is AWFUL! Also,when will 37th go from 287 to Madison? • US 34: widen 34 between Lincoln and Monroe * • Taft Ave. Between Eisenhower& 8th and Eisenhower between Monroe and Lincoln— forget the r roundabouts * • 1St Street improvements • What is the future for West First Street from the river to Garfield? * • Extending Loveland bike path west from Wilson. More bike paths in general. • More bike and ped trails in Northwest Loveland. Would be nice to see bus service in that area also. • Connect the bike path Westside of Boyd [lake] back to Madison or Monroe w/o having to ride around south end of Horseshoe Lake. Bicycle/ Pedestrians (Most important) • BP 23 -Madison/ 16th to Silverleaf,widen for Bike Lanes Highways (Most important) • H-60 -US 34 Widening: Monroe to LCR 3 (1.5 miles east of 1-25) • H-33 -I-25 /US 34 interchange (2) • H-63 - Loveland US 287 /402 intersection • H-30 - Loveland 1-25 /402 interchange (2) • Development around I-25 and Hwy. 34 .. • Not titled, but it is along 1st St. near Madison(according to your map) in Loveland * • US 85 * Transit(Most important) • Improved intercity—intra-city bus service Rail (Most important) • Light rail Ft. Collins to Denver • Run commuter rail from North of Ft. Collins to Colorado Springs—w/o terminating at Union Sta. So one could ride from Loveland to DTC w/o having to change transportation in Denver r Page 2 of 6 January, 2001 Open House Comments For 2025 RTP Update FORT COLLINS Unlisted but important comments: • I am very opposed to building roads east of the interstate. They will encourage more sprawl to the east and the cycle will continue. • Traffic Lights [TSM—11] • Truck Bi-pass—noise pollution—traffic hazard—excessive#s! Also traffic control on these projects— (unlawful drivers) r • I know it is a bad issue,but SH 14—move to Mountain View Drive. * • Six lanes to Denver • I believe a third lane, Denver to Ft. Collins would be money better spent than train service now * • For the past four years, I've been car or vanpooling to Golden from Ft. Collins and I think we need to buy the rights-of-way for rail before they become too expensive. * • The high transportation need is not even on your map—The Vine Drive Parkway. • The most needed transportation project is the Vine Drive Parkway from I-25 to LaPorte * • Do not do roundabout • Get trucks away from downtown.* '^ • Train overpasses or underpasses* • Need to know where and how buses get around Ft Collins [lives near Horsetooth—no address] • Need a bus route on S. Overland Trail near Hughes Stadium. Many students live in the area. The recent �. changes in Rts. 2 & 3 have cut us off. * • Put Troutman through from Mason/College across RR to west. • Can't get out of 4 Seasons • Provide as much rail &bike alternatives wherever possible(2), even if it costs more in the short run. * • Local bus lines do not serve Senior Citizen or retiree areas (E Horsetooth for example) I can't get to city library. • Some how people need to realize public transportation is good, convenient and is "not taking away their freedom to come and go as they want." * • Grid bus system in Fort Collins (2)—not only for college students; -straight routes • More bus routes from Timberline/Harmony to downtown • More frequent bus service—more destinations for bus • More realism in bus planning * • Street car system N& S through Ft. Collins* _ • Bus route to new medical building Harmony&Timberline, since the doctors traded with PVH to move there. [At age 80] I prefer riding the bus, rather than drive the auto to town or the grocers. A bus route would be helpful and useful. * • Local bus service along Drake to Timberline from Lemay* • More S.S. Shuttle bus running plus running Routes 9 and 1 later* • More parking in down/old town Ft. Collins .. • North—south bike path connection between Taft Hill and Shields • Connection of Spring Creek Trail across Timberline • [Most important] Bike safety improves near CSU: Laurel between College & Shields; Campus West; Riverside * • Bike trails will probably eliminate vehicle traffic * • Continuation of bike trail south of Drake along the RR west of Timberline • Extend Fossil Creek Trail east of Shields • EPIC to Harmony Bike Trail * r Page 3 of 6 January, 2001 Open House Comments For 2025 RTP Update r- FORT COLLINS (continued) • The map shows Overland going south to CR 38E. I was not aware this was projected. Is this proposed??? * • You need a place to list least important—in my case bicycle projects. Bikes will never make a serious difference * • Web site is inadequate and landowners are not being consulted on the I-25 corridor plan. • More public transportation and times run—rail,bus, etc.!!! Continue bicycle access improvement * • More frequent routes/ stops near Harmony & Lemay intersections. Add route south of Harmony on Lemay— 1 —2 miles down Lemay • In the 21st century need to move-on to newer, cleaner means of energy& leave behind fossil fuels &the accompanying control exhibited by the automakers &their congressional cronies. • Less cars, asphalt& air pollution—more trains, bicycling • Its already too late—need huge tax on gasoline like in Europe to conserve people ... people driving around in their gas-hog SUV's • Get smaller busses to increase coverage (3-5 people on big busses is stupid) • Need more police officers enforcing safety—too many people running red lights!! Speeding!! ^ Bicycle/ Pedestrian (Most important) • Bike lanes—particularly Prospect and Campus west area • 4`h Bike routes for commuting—off roads! • All bike paths: BP 13—BP—54 _ • BP-8,BP-16, BP-32,BP—4,BP-35,BP-46,BP-51,BP-52,BP-58 * • BP-46,Bike/Ped path along Riverside @ RR, Prospect to Mulberry(2) • The trail that connects Ft. Collins, Loveland, Windsor, Greeley along the Poudre—etc. * • The bike lane projects, especially BP-53 Mason Street Corridor • BP-53 Mason Street Corridor Highways (Most important) • H-7—Larimer County Road 5 Widening—LCR 26 (Crossroads Blvd) to SH 392. As a resident adjacent to CR 5, I am concerned about the impact of widening: noise,pollution, safety,property value degradation * • H-29 -I-25 & SH 392 Interchange (Windsor) (3) * • Loveland interchanges * • H-29 -I-25 and SH 392 Interchange should have been done 5 years ago. Do H-81 -Prospect at 1-25 interchange now, learn from H-29 experience! * • H-64—Regional Park and Ride Lot Pool • H-97 -Downtown River Corridor Plan Implementation(3) • H-86 - Lemay Ave. —Lincoln Ave. to Conifer St., 4-lane Arterial with at grade Railroad Crossing; II- 122 -Timberline Road Widening from 0.5 miles south of Prospect to Vine (2); H-92 - Timberline Road Widening, from Drake to Prospect (2). • H-98 - Taft Hill Improvements,Horsetooth to Old Harmony—definitely needs widening; H-139, Horsetooth Widening from Shields to Taft Hill, could really use some width here as well. • Timberline—Drake intersection * • H-145 - Shields St. widening from Fossil Creek to Trilby * ._ • H-79,H-92,H-99,H-81, H-97, H-76 [and R-2] I feel all projects are important,but the above should have more priority. * • Harmony widening * • Harmony west between Shields and Railroad * Page 4 of 6 January, 2001 Open House Comments For 2025 RTP Update FORT COLLINS (continued) • Timberline * • Horsetooth * • Road widening between CR 40 and CR 42 * • H9—1137 (SH 14), H-81, H-99, 11-92, H-154,H-100 (2), H-75, H-76, H-86,H-143,H-78,H-33, 11- - 29,H-7 * Transit (Most important) • Mass transit along Front Range into Denver *(2) • Public transportation to Denver(2) (with possibilities to connect with transp. to Boulder (I would be .. happy with bus or train) * • Bus routes • [Ranked] 3rd Increase routes and frequency of local buses • T-55—Mason Street Corridor(5)—get done as soon as possible (2) • Mason Street Corridor must be fully funded as a pedestrian&non-motorized friendly direct N-S route all the way through Ft. Collins • T-18—Ft. Collins—Denver Regional Transit Service(4) • [Ranked]lrst Bus service from Ft. Collins to Denver • T-79—New Rte. 9 Extended Transit Service South Transit Center to Harmony and Timberline; T-84— Increased frequency on Rte 1 transit service downtown to Harmony and Increased frequency on Rte 1C to East Harmony &I-25 Transportation Transfer Center; T-23 —Expanded Loveland to Ft. Collins Transit Service (New) (2)* • Transit: 18/22/23/75/79/84 * • Better bus service in Ft. Collins to Downtown—without going by way of campus & changing buses. I would love not to drive. * • T-59 & T-61 —Complementary Demand Response Service(2002-04 &2005-07) * .. Travel Demand Management(Most important) • TDM: 1 /7/ 8 * [all projects] Rail (Most important) • Passenger rail to Denver(9) • Passenger(commuter)rail line to Denver* • [Rank] 2nd - Rail line from Ft. Collins to Denver • R-2—Intra-Regional Passenger Rail Service (4); R-3—Phase II Inter-Regional Passenger Rail—US 34 to Ft Collins and Greeley(4); R-4—Phase I Inter-Regional Passenger Rail—Weld County Rd. 38 to US 34 (4); [all] very necessary * • The rail projects. (2) We can never build enough lanes to alleviate auto traffic. We must pursue alternatives. • Rail transportation* • Continuing rail passenger service from I-25 on to DIA and Denver/Metro Area; linking with Denver Rail * • Passenger rail system all along the front range (4)—to Denver(3).* • Rail system Ft. Collins to Denver* (4) • I strongly encourage the city to support a train from Ft. Collins to Denver. I commute on I-25 everyday from Ft. Collins to Golden and it's already overcrowded. I think we need to think about a passenger train NOW—before it's too late and the whole I-25 corridor is developed. We would surely ride the .- train! * Page 5 of 6 January, 2001 Open House Comments For 2025 RTP Update FORT COLLINS (Continued) • Transportation [rail] to Denver from Ft. Collins would be an excellent idea • R-9 - Drake Rd. West of College RR Grade Separation* R-5—Lemay Ave. North, Grade Separated Railroad crossing; R-6—Timberline Rd. North, Grade Separated Railroad Crossing at Vine Dr., R-9—Drake Rd. West of College RR Grade Separation, R-16— Union Pacific RR Overpass at Windsor Road(CR 32) * REGIONAL COMMENTS Unlisted but important comments: • Pueblo/Raton Pass to Cheyenne/Laramie • Light rail between Cheyenne and Pueblo—Now before it's too expensive to think about • Hwy 60 and Parish Ave. in Johnstown • I strongly support a rail system from Ft. Collins to Colorado Springs—I also support a rail link along I- 70, Denver to Vail * ._ • Front range rail system from Cheyenne to Trinidad * • We would strongly support a train from I-70 (west) to Denver* .- Most important projects: • Northern front range projects [shown on regional map] (2) • The North Front Range Regional Plan [Map ideas] Other comments: Get railroad out, convert its right-of-way to high-speed traffic. .- Note: If you have questions about this summary,please contact Katherine Woods, City Visions at 970-224-4944 or kwoods@cityvisions.org. Thank you. r- Page 6 of 6 January, 2001 Open House Comments For 2025 RTP Update 2025 Regional Transportation Plan Open House Comments (May 2001) The following is a summary of comments gathered from the third set of open houses for the 2025 NFR Regional Transportation Plan. The purpose of this set of open houses was to present the draft plan. There were two previous sets of open houses where comments were gathered and incorporated into the draft. The open houses were held in May at the Greeley Mall, the Multi- Purpose Room at the Loveland Library, and the Foothills Fashion Mall in Fort Collins. The open houses were held on a Saturday, and then displays were left for people to view and make additional comments into the following week. Comments are identified by open house locations. (FC stands for Fort Collins, G for Greeley, and L for Loveland.) Summary: While the primary purpose of this set of open houses was to present the draft plan, citizens were given another opportunity to comment on their overall assessment of the plan and process. There were 32 comment sheets returned. Seventeen (17) people asked to be added to the mailing or e- mail list. Comments requiring a specific response will be forwarded to the appropriate entity. During the staffed open houses we spoke with: 7 people in Loveland, 40 people in Greeley and 64 in Fort Collins. Additionally, a"Where Do You Live?"board was posted at each open house/ display. People used 20 pins in Loveland, 85 pins in Greeley and 148 pins in Fort Collins. Bicycle/ Pedestrian -Need more off street bike trails—less emphasis on highways (L) -More bike paths between towns. I would be willing to work on transportation planning (L) -Bicycle lanes on Horsetooth,with streetlights especially around hospital. (FC) Highway/ High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes -Need to complete US 34/US 85 interchange ASAP (G) -Overpass on 85 (G) -Bypass in Greeley: 16 St& 18 St intersections "3 Ave"has been closed between 16 & 18 St so access does not exist from 85 Bypass to 5 St. going west(G) -85 Bypass down onto 85 Business in North Greeley needs attention(G) -We need more expressways and parkways to accommodate for growth. Accept growth—then you can control the negative effects—DON'T fight growth (FC) Hi-Way 287 should go up/down via CR19 and 21 to alleviate congestion on College Ave. through '„ Old Town. (FC) Transit (Includes bus and vanpool) -I think they should have a bus that runs from Greeley to Fort Collins and 24 hours a day. (G) -We need to move quickly on a public transportation system—with fuel prices rising it is not "economical"to continue in the manner we are going (G) -When are new bus routes happening? (G) -Bus route 2x a day up US 85 to Pierce would be helpful to bring people into Greeley for shopping/medical. (G) -More public transportation—here to Denver. (L) -Need much better bus service (more often and more locations. (L) -Improve bus system with shelters and benches. Public restrooms at certain stops. (FC) May 31, 2001 Page 1 of 2 -We'd like to have some public transport access to our corner(Trilby& Taft) or at least Trilby& Shields. (There are 2 new developments in that region My parents could then use the library & FRCC or go to CSU or the Senior Center.) (FC) -For those of us in wheelchairs, a transportation system from Ft. Collins to Denver needs to be in place that will carry wheelchairs. The shuttle services do not even have set-ups for chairs. (FC) -Keep the South side Shuttle (Transfort) (FC) Rail -We need passenger rail to Denver, particularly in light of aging population(G) -We really need an efficient rail connection to Denver and/or Boulder. (L) -Some sort of railway/transit between Greeley &Ft. Collins would be great—well used. (FC) -Let's focus on a mass transit rail system. Is it possible to connect to Denver? (FC) -Please work on rail opportunities ASAP, and less focus on roads (FC) -The rail projects are most important for future. Autos only add congestion (L) Other Po -We should all ride some healthy product to save animals,people and our future. (L) -Sorry! Need to have higher densities with more open space. Need fast rail transit! Need to get people out of their cars or will become another California. (L) -T19 yes. H9 is more important than H76 or H13,R19 (1) yes! H29 needs to be moved way up! (Should have been done 3-4 years ago. Plan ahead like 125 &Prospect) should be one if high school in 2006. Need to find a way to get Wellington to join. (FC) -I want to see more emphasis from the state level to connect corridors beyond our region. (FC) -Planning for transportation (rail &highways)needs to include the needs of Industry &Mfg & the .. transport of goods (FC) -It's about time(FC) -Roads are only part of the problem as I see it, enforcement of the traffic laws such as speed should -' be enforced also. (FC) Summary of Responses to Comment Sheet Questions ►^ Question Strongly 2 3 4 Strongly agree 1 Disagree 5 1. The focus on regionally significant ^ corridors and a multi-modal 9 5 lZ 3 1 transportation system will address our future transportation needs. 2. Given current financial limitations, this Regional Transportation Plan 1 4 7 3 23 effectively addresses the current and ^ future needs of the region. 3. There has been adequate opportunity for input on this planning 5 4 4 5 1 process. 'Corridors will change 2 Too much growth for transportation 3 Need a lot more money Note: Twelve(12) sheets were returned without answering these questions. Submitted by Katherine Woods, City Visions. Please contact her at (970)-224-4944 or kwoods@cityvisions.org with questions. May 31, 2001 Page 2 of 2 Hello