HomeMy WebLinkAbout20002737.tiff MEMORANDUM
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OT
Division of Transportation Development
4201 East Arkansas Avenue,EP-8606 • ,,,, ,,.,,,,7„M",,,,,,,,,
Denver,Colorado 80222
(303) 757-9525
DATE: October 25, 2000
TO: Statewide Transportation Advisory Conunittee
FROM: Jennifer Finch.. DirectorL; � y ;yr .
j
Division of Transportatjoh Oevelop ent
SUBJECT: Transmittal of the Final raft 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan
Enclosed is a copy of the final draft 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado''
Future. This draft culminates Colorado's grass-roots planning process involving local, regional
and state participants within the state's 15 Transportation Planning Regions (TPRs).
The draft 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan was previously released for public review ano
comment during july and August of this year. A summary of the comments received was
provided to you after the comment period closed and discussed at the August 23 STAC meeting.
On September 29, another STAC meeting was held to discuss the Policy Guidance section of the
2020 Plan. On October 18, a workshop was held with the Transportation Commission to discuss
the Policy Guidance section of the draft, and the changes proposed by the STAC. Pet the
Commission's direction, staff made changes to the draft and is novt distributing the 2020 Plan fur
final comment.
Some of the changes made include the following:
• Under Introduction: Additional discussion is provided for congestion, safety, system
operation, under-served populations, goods movement and funding. Also, a more detailed
description of the planning process with regard to the long-range plan, TIP and project
selection is added for MPOs, non-MPOs and Indian tribal nations.
• Under Strategic Framework: The Policy Guidance statements have been amended per the
Commission's direction from their October 18th workshop.
• Under Socio-Economic & Environmental Portrait: The Roadway Assessment discussion
which included information about VMT and surface condition has been further developed
and moved to the Passenger Mobility section. The descriptions and discussions for the three
sub-regional areas have been revised to include consistent topical discussions and now have
similar level of detail. Staff has also updated and corrected demographic projections to
include the latest information available from the State Demographer. A new map dills-n.101-.2
growth areas in the state has also been added.
• Under Passenger Mobility: The Rail discussion has been expanded to include passenger
rail. Data and data sources for the Rail map have been verified and corrected where
appropriate. The Roadway Assessment has been expanded to include information from other.
less appropriate, sections.
i/—/-\eoo
2000-2737
C
Final Draft 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan
Page 2
• Under Freight Report: Data and sources have been verified and corrections have been made
An NHS map has been included in this section.
• Under Developing the 2020 Plan: Staff collaborated with a subcommittee of the STAG and
CCl/CML to develop and expanded discussion of the issues related to identifying local
roadway needs, previous needs assessments, and current needs assessments by a variety of
local entities.
• A new chapter, Unfunded Projects and Programs, has been added: Staff added this section
to assist understanding what comprises the unfunded component of the 2020 Statewide
Transportation Plan. A new appendix "G" has been created as documentation for the
information presented in this new chapter.
• Appendices E and F have been revised to reflect minor amendments approved by the regional
planning commissions and Transportation Commission.. These revised appendices available
on CDOT's website (www.dot.state.co.us/business) or upon request.
To assist review of this final draft, labels have been included on the pages where significant
revisions have been made from the July 5, 2000 draft Minor editing revisions or refinements to
the text have not been called out.
Plans are being distributed to 1 10local libraries, county clerk offices, CDOT Region Offices. r m l
COOT Headquarters for public review and comment. The Plan will also be available for review
on the Department's website. The comment period will run from October 30 through November
10, 2000.
Please review the plan at your convenience and call me or my staff at 303-757-9525 if you have
any questions.
Enclosure
FINAL DRAFT
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan
INVESTING IN COLORADO'S FUTURE
IOT
SIRINSINIS
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
The Colorado Department of Transportation
October 25,2000
Send comments by November 10, 2000 to:
Leah Lane
Statewide Planning& Support Unit
Colorado Department of Transportation
4201 East Arkansas Avenue
Denver, CO 80222
Phone: (303)757-9761
Fax: (303) 757-9727
leah.lane@dot.state.co.us
DMJM
Daniel,Mann,)ohnwn,&Mendenhall
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents 1
Introduction
The Past 5
The Present 6
The Future 12
Linking the 2015 Plan to the 2020 Plan 12
Strategic Framework 16
Socioeconomic and Environmental Portrait 29
Statewide Demographic Characteristics 31
Environmental Overview 52
Passenger Mobility 57
Rail Element 57
Transit Element 60
Bicycle and Pedestrian Element 64
Transportation Demand Management 67
Aviation Element 68
Intelligent Transportation Systems 73
Telecommunications 75
Roadway Assessment 77
Coii,orado Freight Report 84
Process 84
Freight and Colorado's Economy 85
Colorado's Freight Transportation System 86
Freight Needs Assessment ., 89
Regulations, Policies and Issues 94
The 2020 Transportation Plan 95
Developing Regional Transportation Plans 95
Statewide Programs and Transportation Commission Priorities 96
.- •
Table of Contents 1
.The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
Local Roadways 47
Transportation Financing 102.
Fiscally Constrained Plan. 109
Unfunded Projects and Programs 11 4
Statewide Transportation Improvement Program 1 l E
Future Update & Issue Resolution 121
Appendix A - Conformance with Federal and State Legislation 124
Appendix B -Title VI and Environmental Justice 6-27-2)00 131
Appendix C - Public Involvement Process 134
Appendix D - Public Comments and Responses 1:36
Appendix E - Fiscally Constrained Projects published seperately
Appendix F- Unfunded Project and Programs.... published seperately
Appendix G - Project and Programs 1 42
2 Table of Contents
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.
Index of Figures
Colorado Issues 6
Colorado Trends -41/0 Change 1990 to 1998 6
Colorado's Five Metropolitan Planning Organizations 10
Progress on 2015 Plan Recommendations 14
Colorado Population Projections* 31
Average Annual Growth (map) 32
Change in Age Groups 33
Projected Labor Force and Employed Persons 36
Employment by Sector 37
Collorado's Three Geographic Areas (map) 38
Recreational Attractors and Tribal Lands(map) 51
Non-Attainment Areas(map) 54
Draft Rail Corridors of State Significance(map) 59
Transit Funding Sources 62
Colorado Passenger Services(map) 63
FAA Funding 70
Colorado Airports(map) 72
Daily VMT Totals 78
Surface Condition 79
Mobility Conditions on Colorado State Highways 1999 (map) 82
Mobility Conditions on Colorado State Highways 2020(map) 83
Colorado National Highway System 87
Rail 88
H •
Introduction 3
♦ The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: investing in Colorado's Future
♦
Total 20-year Transportation Revenue 106
CDOT Resource Allocations 108
2020 Fiscally Constrained Plan 112
Investment Category Project Locations 113
Investment Category 115
Modes 115
Strategic Corridors 116
Project/Programs Greater than $50 Million 117
Statewide Transportation Improvement Program—2001 -2006 119
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's
Future was prepared in part utilizing federal State Planning and
Research funds from the Federal Highway Administration.
♦ -----♦
4 Table of Contents
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
• ♦
INTRODUCTION
The development of the 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan spanned the end of
the 20th Century and beginning of the 215,century. Long-range planning requires
looking back at the unmet transportation needs accumulated during the last part
of the 2001 Century and looking forward, trying to envision the transportation
requirements of the new millennium.
The Post
Colorado's first transportation plan, adopted in January 1996, covered the period
from 1996 to 2015. The 2015 Plan recognized that "significant resources have
been invested in Colorado's transpodation system over the past century.
Protecting this investment is crucial to the P/an and involves sound maintenance Protecting [our] investment is cruua
practices, maximizingeficiencies, and augmenting existing operations." Priorities to the Plan and involves sound
identified in this first plan included statewide programs such as surface maintenance practices, maximizinc
treatment, bridges, maintenance and operation of the state highway system, efficiencies, and augmenting existin'
maintaining existing transit service, safety, etc. In addition, priorities were operations
identified through the regional planning process, ranging from basic roadway
improvements like adding shoulders along rural highways, reconstructing roads
with poor pavement condition or deteriorated bases, adding capacity to reduce
congestion, improving or expanding transit service, and supporting strategies to
reduce congestion,such as carpooling programs.
Revenue projeclions from existing transportation sources were compared to the
priority needs in the 2015 transportation plan, resulting in a funding shortfall. This
situation sparked discussion in many venues because transportation is so inter-
related with everyday life. A primary challenge to the transportation planning
process is balancing the magnitude of transportation demand with available
revenues and reaching consensus on priorities.
♦ ♦
Introduction 5
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
The Present
The Present changed from 7-5-2000 draft
by: a)relocating roadway inventory MAJOR ISSUES
information to Roadway Assessment
starting on page 77; b)expanding issues Based on a series of public surveys sponsored by COOT since 1992,
discussion;and,c)including a discussion transportation remains an important issue facing Colorado. The table below
on MPO and 7PR regional planning. tracks changing perceptions of major issues in Colorado over the past decade.
Colorado Issues
Issue 1992 1994 1997 2000
Survey Survey Survey Survey
Growth 7% 19% 38% 26.5%_
Economy 28% 9% 7% 1.3%
Transportation 2% 6.6% 20% 15.6°%,_-_1
Crime 2% 22% 8% 8.1% 1i
Education 24% 5.5% 6% 14.6%-_]
As the table illustrates, the number of respondents who identified growth as the
most significant issue facing Colorado rose from 7% in 1992 to 19% in 1994,
38% in 1997, and 26.5% in 2000. Obviously, growth and its attendant
transportation issues are foremost in the public eye following the growth cycle of
the late 1990s. Economic concerns have declined over the same time concurrent
with the period of economic expansion. Other related trends are presented
below.
Colorado Trends—% Change 1990 to 1998
Colorado Trends
1990 - 1998 Percent Increase
k3:t a,-. ec�Wr , x
Population :_ tp�" „ 4. .1`
Labor Forcen- v ir"'a s } '" `2
1xr 1 •
4•1.&.z,Y “••bf YuG is,Y4ltair-Zt4;41.4:::,•;;I:6,3tr
DVMT-SH System Rte'' , ; �.
0 25 50
• ----1
6 Introduction
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.
Colorado's existing transportation system is challenged to keep pace with the
growth in population and the labor force, The State is crisscrossed with over
80,000 miles of public roads. As the above graph illustrates, use of these
roadways measured in terms of daily vehicle miles of travel (DVMT) is growing
significantly. Although DVMT is growing at a faster rate on non-state highways,
over 60% of daily VMT occur on state highways.
OTHER ISSUES WITHTRANSPORTATIONIMPACTS
• The March 2000 Customer Survey conducted on behalf of CDOT
provides some insights regarding current issues which the 2020
Statewide Transportation Plan should consider:
'Traffic congestion was the most frequently mentioned concern, named
by 40% of the JsurveyJ respondents. Congestion was more likely to be
rated as the number one transportation issue by those residing in the
metro Denver or the rest of the Front Range compared to those living in
the Eastern Plains or on the Western Slope.
When explicitly asked to rate congestion... about three-quarters fin metro
Denver and 60%of respondents in the rest of the Front Rangel reporting
that streets and highways are vey or totally" congested. Such
sentiment was not as strong in the Eastern Plains and Western Slope.
Given the strong feelings about congestion by those living along the
Front Range, it is not surprising they were more likely to give a higher
priority to congestion relief over maintenance and repair or transportation
safety However, those living in the rest of the state were more likely to
rate maintenance and repair as deserving a higher priority over
transportation safety and congestion relief."
• Transportation Safety
"When asked what they perceived to be the most common cause of
traffic crashes in Colorado, most (83%) respondents chose driver
behavior. However, improvements to roadways were given a higher
priority for improving traffic safety than were public safety campaigns:
• Transportation System Management and Operations
Given the high usage rate of the transportation system, it is imperative
the system be operating efficiently and effectively to maximize its
performance. A range of operational and management tools can be
implemented at relatively low costs compared to expanding the system.
Some of these improvements involve the use of higher technologies that
transmit critical information to both drivers and system managers,
allowing for route alterations, dispatch of emergency vehicles, adjusting
traffic control devices,etc.
1F �
Introduction 7
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future♦
Travel demand management provides a set of tools to enhance system
operations by reducing or eliminating the number of trips being made
during peak periods.
• Transportation Dependent Populations
Personal mobility is a critical part of quality of life in Colorado allowing
access to jobs, medical, educational, and recreational facilities.
Coloradans who are either too young to drive, have physical or non-
physical impairments which preclude their ability to drive, or do not owr a
personal vehicle are among those who may not be well served by the
current transportation system. This segment of the population requires
transportation options in order to meet their daily mobility needs.
• Goods Movement
The efficient movement of commodities within and through Colorado is
critical to the state's economic well being. Congested roadways and
reductions in freight rail service due to consolidations and abandonments
are current issues facing the freight industries, and pose significant
challenges in terms of planning for long-range transportation system
improvements.
• Funding
Traditional transportation revenue sources in Colorado have not been
keeping pace with need. Among the funding issues that continue to pose
significant challenges is the lack of a state source of funding for transit
inflationary impacts on buying power over time, and the requirement for
voter approval on taxing and spending.
REGIONALPLANNING
Colorado's 15 Transportation Planning Regions (tPRs) updated their regional
transportation plans during 1998 and 1999. Starting with the needs and. priorities
already in the 2015 statewide transportation plan, each region reviewed current
Colorado's 15 regional transportation
plans form the foundation for transportation issues and the vision, goals and objectives established to guide
Colorado s State Transportation plan regional transportation planning process. During the update process, a number
of events occurred that affected regional as well as statewide transportation
planning processes:
• The federal Transportation Equity Act for the 2151 Century was passed by
Congress. The funding provisions of this legislation required an update of
CDOT's revenue projections.
• Completion of several major investment studies. The Southeast Corricor
in the Denver metropolitan area began the Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) process, and a new funding strategy was developed
This culminated in the passage of:WO ballot initiatives in November 1999
• --1
8 Introduction
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.
to allow bonding for both the highway and light rail components of this
corridor.
• Acceleration of the development of performance measures and linking
these measures to the Transportation Commission's resource allocation
process. This activity resulted in the reallocation of the six-year (2001 -
2006) and 20-year (2001 - 2020) revenue projections, affecting the
amount available for funding regional priorities.
Since the statewide plan is based on an integration and consolidation of the 15
regional transportation plans, it is important to provide a discussion about the
basic similarities as well as important differences concerning the regional
process.
Regional Planning y Metropolitan Planning Organizations
(MPOs)
Five of the 15 TPRs involve Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) which
have specific federal requirements related to the development of long-range
transportation plans and Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs).
Metropolitan planning areas with populations larger than 200,000 are designated
as transportation management areas (fMAs) which places additional federal
requirements and responsibilities on the respective MPOs regarding long-range
planning, programming, project selection, etc. Colorado has two TMAs, the
Denver and Colorado Springs metropolitan areas.
Requirements associated with the federal Clean Air Act Amendments place
additional responsibilities on the three MPOs in air quality non-attainment areas;
the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG), Pikes Peak Area
Council of Governments (PPACG), and North Front Range Transportation and
Air Quality Planning Council (NFRT&AQPC). DRCOG and PPACG are
designated as carbon monoxide non-attainment areas. In Colorado Springs, the
boundaries for the TMA, the non-attainment area, and the Transportation
Planning Region are consistent. However, in the Denver metropolitan area the
TMA and carbon monoxide non-attainment area is somewhat smaller than the
Transportation Planning Region, which encompasses the rural mountainous and
plains areas outside the metropolitan planning area. The non-attainment-area
MPOs have a federal requirement to update their long-range transportation plans
on a three-year cycle, versus the five-year cycle for the other MPOs.
The following table summarizes key information about Colorado's five MPOs
♦ •
Introduction 9
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future♦
Colorado's Five Metropolitan Planning Organizations
Non-
Metropolitan Area MPO TMA attainment
Area I
Denver Regional Council of
Denver Y v
Governments(DRCOG)
Colorado Pikes Peak Area Council of
Springs Governments(PPACG) Y Y
North Front Range Transportation
Fort Collins,
&Air Quality Planning Council
Greeley,Loveland N 1'
(NFRT&AQPC)
Pueblo Area Council of
Pueblo Governments(PACOG) N PI
Grand Junction Grand Junction/Mesa County N N
The Greater Denver Area Transportation Planning Region includes Adams,Aapahoe.Bolder,
Broomfield,Clear Creek,Denver,Douglas,Gilpin,and Jefferson Counties.The non-attainment
area does not include Clear Creel,or Gilpin or the eastern half of Adams and Arapahoe Counties
CDOT's transportation planning process recognizes the roles and responsibilities
of the MPOs regarding long-range planning, programming, project selection, etc.
as described below.
Integration of MPO Long-Range Plans into the Statewide
Transportation Plans
Each MPO is required to produce a long-range transportation plan.To meet state
requirement, the MPOs produce a "preferred" plan as well as the financially
constrained plan required under federal regulations. Both the preferred and the
financially constrained elements of the regional transportation plans are
incorporated into the statewide plan.
In air quality non-attainment areas, the DRCOG, PPACG, and NFRT&AQPC's
financially constrained plans have current air quality conformity determinations
as required by federal law. Consequently, any projects contained in these
conforming plans are the MPOs' highest priority for funding.
PACOG and Grand Junction/Mesa County MPOs do not nave air quality
conformity requirements as their respective metropolitan planning areas are
designated as attainment areas for air quality. Both of these MF'Os have
preferred and financially constrained elements to their regional transportation
plans and both are integrated into the statewide plan.
10 Introduction
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.
MPO Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Development
and Project Selection
MPOs are required to produce a staged, multi-year, intermodal financially
constrained program of transportation projects that is consistent with the
metropolitan plan. This program (3 to 6 years in scope) is called a Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP). Coordination between the state and the MPOs is
required for TIP development.The role of the MPOs in regard to project selection
is expanded if they are TMAs (DRCOG and PPACG). Further, the MPOs in air
quality non-attainment areas (DRCOG, PPACG, and NFRT&AQPC) must have
air quality conformity determinations for their respective TIPs.
The Governor must approve the TIPs, which are then wholly incorporated into
the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program(STIP).
Regional Planning in Non-MPO Regions
Ten TPRs are rural in nature and do not involve MPOs. In these rural areas,
Regional Planning Commissions (RPCs) are responsible for developing regional
transportation plans and establishing the regional priorities for projects within the
regional transportation plans.
Like their MPO counterparts, the RPCs in the rural transportation planning
regions develop long-range transportation plans that have both a "preferred" and
financially constrained element. Both elements are integrated into the statewide
transportation plan.
STIP Development and Project Selection in non-MPO TPRs
In TPRs that do not contain MPOs, a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)
is not required. However, regional priorities are established by the Regional
Planning Commissions through their regional transportation planning process
then discussed with CDOT and the Transportation Commission through the
Project Priority and Programming Process (4 P) on a biennial basis. The 4 P is
used to establish the STIP and is further discussed in the STIP chapter starting
on page 117.
Transportation Planning Involving Indian Tribal Governments
Colorado's two Indian Nations, the Southem Ute Indian Tribe and the Ute
Mountain Ute Tribe are members of the Southwest Regional Transportation
Planning Commission for the Southwest TPR. The transportation plans for both
Tribal Nations are incorporated into the regional transportation plan for the
Southwest TPR and subsequently incorporated into the statewide transportation
plan. Both Tribes participated in establishing the regional priorities included in the
Southwest Regional Transportation Plan and participate in the biennial 4 P
process for STIP development.
• 0
Introduction 11
•The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future♦
The Future
Just as Colorado's 20-Year Transportation Plan looked forward to 2015,
anticipating how growth and development, economic conditions, advances in
technology, and lifestyle changes would impact Colorado's transportation needs,
the 2020 Plan pushes the planning horizon even further.
Reader feedback from the Summer 1998 Statewide P/an Newsletter highlighted
what is important, in terms of transportation.to Coloradans' vision of the future:
• MultilntermodalismA seamless multi-modal transportation system fits
together and multiple choices will enhance the ability io meet mobility
needs.
• Land Use and TransportationHow Colorado's land use decisions
determine the way people, goods,and information need to move.
Watchwords for the future
• Growth and DevelopmentHow growth and development is managed
Multi-modalism can make or break the state's ability to provide for transportation facilities
rand Use & Transportation and services.
Growth & Development • The Environment:How we mitigate transportation impacts to air, soil,
and water quality,and wildlife habitat directly affects our quality of life.
fnvironmenf
• Technology: How quickly new technologies can be deployed will
determine the state's ability to avoid stagnation.
• Energy Sourcestow exploring alternative energy sources can open up
new opportunities for the 21st Century.
The challenge is to balance needs and desires, resources with priorities and
equity with effectiveness.The statewide transportation planning process provides
the forum for meeting this challenge.
linking the 2015 Plan to the 2020 Pion
The 2015 plan was Colorado's first long-range, statewide, multi-modal
The 2020 plan is structured around a transportation plan. Its strongest asset was the consensus among local, regional,
transportation investment strategy and state participants about the long-term needs expressed in the plan.
that focuses on System Qualify,
Safety,Mobility, Program Delivery The lack of a comprehensive investment strategy was identified as a component
and Strategic Projects. that could be strengthened. Although CDOT has been carrying out construction
and maintenance priorities since the plan's adoption, detailed accountability br
plan accomplishments is difficult to assess. Consequently, the 2015 plan also
• ----♦
12 Introduction
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Futures
recommended that the concept of a transportation investment strategy, linked to
performance measures, be explored.
In 1997, CDOT formulated a short-term investment strategy focused on the
Strategic Transportation Project Investment Program. A second phase further
developed the investment strategy by defining five investment categories. The
third phase set goals for the Department and identified pilot performance
measures to tracking the impact of investments.
The progress made on the transportation investment strategy provides a critical
link to the 2020 plan. The 2020 plan has been structured around the
transportation investment strategy, categorizing projects and programs by the
investment categories: System 'Duality, Safety, Mobility, Program Delivery and
Strategic Projects.
CDOT has taken an additional step toward accountability by establishing an
electronic link between all projects in the 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan to
the six-year, Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). In effect,
this electronic link ensures only projects from the long-range plan's fiscally
constrained element can be included in the STIP and subsequently funded. This
electronic system, when fully implemented, will allow tracking of any project from
the long-range plan to construction completion. The following tables provide a
report card on progress in addressing recommendations contained in the 2015
plan:
4 ♦
Introduction 13
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future♦
Progress on 2015 Plan Recommendations
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
Recommendation Status
Completed 1999.Information provided for use in
Conduct statewide transit needs and benefits study
regional plan update process.
Completed 1998.Information provided for u,,e in
Conduct statewide passenger rail feasibility study
regional plan update process.
Completed 2000 Information provided for use in
Conduct freight needs study
regional plan update process.
Travel Behavior Inventory for Denver Met-o area
Conduct passenger origin and destination studies in Denver, Colorado
2000.Information to be used in updated
Springs, Pueblo and Grand Junction areas
regional travel models.
Completed 1998. Programmatic Environmental
Conduct major investment study in the 1-70 Mountain corridor
Impact Statement in progress
Coordinate multiple planning activities in 1-25 south corridor On-going
Completed 1997 as part of Moda Plan draft report
Assess feasibility of statewide travel demand management(TDM) A TOM`toolbox'was developed for use in the
regional plan update process.
City of Boulder Congestion Pricing Study
Conduct detailed evaluation of congestion pricing techniques completed 1996:CDOT Region E High OccJpancy
Toll Lane Study in progress
Intelligent Transportation System Strategic"Ian
Conduct ITS corridor studies and expand ITS technologies statewide completed 1998; implementation of fiusines s Plan
is in progress
PLANNING PROCESS
Recommendation _ Status
Completed 1997 and in place for July 1958
Review and refine planning process through rulemaking
initiation of regional plan update cycle
Revise regional planning guidebook,focusing on improving data sources, Completed 1998 and in place for July 191:8
cost information,and format consistency initiation of regional plan update cycle
Review and refine the methods and processes for regional/statewide Completed 1996. Revers je projector's were
planning revenue forecasting _ reviewed in 1998.
Review and refine existing resource allocation process Completed 1998 and revised 1999
Utilize regional planning process to explore potential for developing Y i
coordinated decision making process balancing long-range transportation, On-going
land use,and quality of life needs
Review planning resource requirements Reviewed annually
CDOT developing Internet links to transportation
Develop and implement a transportation information management system
information JI
•
14 Introduction
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
♦
As the update of the long-range transportation plan approached, the
- ransportation Commission made several critical decisions to ensure continuity
between the 2015 and the 2020 plans:
• All projects in the 2015 plan and the 1999-2004 Statewide Transportation
Improvement Program (STIP) would be provided to the Regional
Planning Commissions in the Transportation Planning Regions to
consider as they updated their regional transportation plans.
• The Strategic Project Investment Program would be a funded portion of
the 2020 statewide transportation plan.
THE OUTCOME
This plan is the result of policy decisions developed since the 2015 plan, the
update of regional transportation plans during 1998-1999, and a look into the 21St The plan is the blueprint for a
Century. It is the guidebook for identifying transportation needs from a multitude multi-modal, accessible, seamless
of proposed projects through wise investment policies and strategies; and, it is transportation system
the sourcebook for those transportation projects to be funded with state and
federal transportation funds. It is:
THE 2020 STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN:
INVESTING IN COLORADO'S FUTURE!
•
Introduction 15
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.• STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK
Regional transportation plans are the primary source for transportation project
demand and priorities. These regional plans have been integrated and
consolidated into this comprehensive statewide plan using strategies developed
by the Transportation Commission. These strategies define how priorities are
established and resources allocated. This chapter describes the framework for
setting those priorities.
MISSIONSTATEMENT
In November 1996, the Transportation Commission
adopted Policy Directive 14, Department Mission,
Values, and Goals. The mission of the i ;,.
Colorado Department of Transportation is .:
1
"...to provide the best multi-modal '
transportation system for Colorado r
"04
that most effectively moves Mission '
people, goods and information." 'y k•
:.
Goals 1'Ig,.
DEPARTMENTVALUES —
Objectives
To guide CDOT in the , ...,' f
implementation of this x4 ,
mission,Policy Policies �O. ,
E
14kl NI, - � rti _
the er 044.; r� ..7.�,.;+�.�z._'. 7'1%. ��d3.r�. ,= s�
values to
guide CDOT as it implements the transportation system:
• Work in partnership with all
• Provide leadership in transportation
• Take pride in ourselves and our work
• Demand quality of ourselves
• Strive to improve our personal skills and talents
• Use resources wisely
• Make decisions which are compatible with Coloraio's quality o` life,
environmental,and economic goals
• ----.
16 Strategic Framework
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future,
The Transportation Commission also adopted Policy Directive 13, the Statewide
Transportation Policies. These statements describe CDOT's values in greater
detail, and appear on the next two pages.
4, ♦
Strategic Framework 17
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorodo's Future
Colorado Department of Transportation
Statewide Transportation Policies
Adopted: April 21, 1994
Reaffirmed: November 1996; March 1998;February 2000
CUSTOMER FOCUS
CDOT will strengthen its relationships with the increasingly informed and interested citizenry by reinforcing the public
participation process to include out-reach, early involvement and review, candid and understandable presentations,
and consistency in follow-up. The process must include local governments, interest groups,and formal organizations,
along with methods to solicit and respond to the views of all those impacted by transportation performance,
improvements and financing.
LEADERSHIP
CDOT will bring together varied interests to address the transportation needs and issues of Colorado's ever-changing
social and physical environment. With a commitment to its vision, CDOT will utilize its unique statewide perspective
and range of expertise in reaching optimal transportation solutions with its broad customer base.
MANAGEMENT OF THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
CDOT will ensure through partnership that a unified statewide transportation system is panned, developed,
coordinated, operated and maintained by considering the full range of alternatives available to service transportation
needs. The management process should facilitate the movement of people, goods, information, and services.
System management should promote efficient use and enhancement of existing facilities and preserve corridors for
future transportation demand.
INTERMODALISM
CDOT will develop a balanced intermodal transportation system that provides the most appropriate transportation
options, and takes advantage of the inherent efficiencies of each mode. CDOT will go beyond the traditional single-
occupancy vehicle highway improvements by emphasizing a multi-modal and intermodal approach to transportation
planning, development, and maintenance. Such an approach is necessary to respond to the diverse needs of both
urban and rural customers, to preserve and improve the environment, and to ensure the connectivity and interaction
of modes.
PARTNERSHIP
CDOT will develop, support and/or participate in the formation of formal and informal partnerships for the quality
development and implementation of Colorado's transportation goals. Through cooperative efforts anc shared
responsibilities, these partnerships will help to leverage the limited resources available, and tap new sources of
support for transportation development in Colorado.
INTEGRATE REGIONAL AND STATEWIDE PRIORITIES
CDOT will collaborate with cur partners to build consensus for the integration of local, regional and statewide
transportation priorities. In order to optimize a limited resource base, effective integration requires mutual respect
while addressing the issues arid priorities of competing interests.
18 Strategic Framework
, The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future_
FINANCE
COOT will pursue diverse and cooperative funding options to reflect the interrelated nature of all modes within the
transportation system. Public understanding of the financial requirements of the transportation system is a
prerequisite for developing additional funding options that are reliable, equitable, flexible, adequate and
acceptable. In an increasingly competitive environment for already limited resources, CDOT acknowledges and
shares the public's concern over the cost and efficiency of government services. CDOT will continue to enhance
its financial management practices to demonstrate accountability toward achieving established benchmarks.
SAFETY
COOT will work cooperatively to promote safety in transportation through education, engineering and
enforcement. CDOT will support innovative programs to enhance user, worker and vehicular safety, to improve
conditions and facilities,and to reduce the risk of injuries,fatalities,and related costs.
BALANCE QUALITY OF LIFE FACTORS
COOT recognizes the complex interrelationship of the environment, economic vitality and mobility, and is
committed to balancing these factors in the development and implementation of the statewide transportation plan.
By working with local, regional and state interests, CDOT will advocate the development of a coordinated
decision-making process that balances the long range transportation, land use and quality of life needs in
Colorado. It is not the intent of the Commission or CDOT to prohibit or interfere with local land use decisions.
ENVIRONMENT
COOT will promote a transportation system that is environmentally responsible and encourages preservation of
the natural and enhancement of the created environment for current and future generations. We will incorporate
social, economic. and environmental concerns into the planning, design, construction, maintenance and
operations of the state's existing and future transportation system. With the active participation of the general
public, federal, slate and local agencies, we will objectively consider all reasonable alternatives to avoid or
minimize adverse impacts.
ACCESSIBILITY
CDOT will promote a transportation system that is reliable and accessible to potential users, including the •
transportation disadvantaged. Accessibility includes the availability of modal choices and connectivity, ease of
use, relative cost, proximity to service and frequency of service. CDOT encourages multi-modal accessibility to
employment,medical care,shopping and other commerce,housing and leisure.
SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
CDOT recognizes the value of human capital in achieving state goals, and maintains a commitment to fostering
nondiscriminatory practices in a safe and healthy work environment. Our commitment to fair and equitable
business practices encompasses the interests of all of our customers. Overall, the general welfare of the total
public will be continually reflected in CDOT's decision-making processes.
4 •
Strategic Framework 19
♦ The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future♦
THE COLORADODEPARTMENT OFTRANSPORTATIOI4S
INTERMODALVISION
In 1998 the Transportation Commission adopted the "Intermodal Vision" to guide
development of mobility strategies on the State transportation system.
"COOT will plan for and develop a transportation system that
integrates all modes of transportation including automobile,
transit, aviation, rail, truck, bicycle, pedestrian and travel demand
management (TDM) to effectively and safely move people,
goods and information to meet Colorado's mobility needs in a
manner that is environmentally, economically and socially
responsible."
PERFORMANCE-BASED TRANSPORTATIONINVESTMENTSTRATEGY
When allocating available funds to achieve its mission in the most effective
manner possible, the Commission balances many wide-ranging and competing
transportation needs. To aid the Commission in making effective investment
decisions and to increase accountability to the citizens of Colorado, a
transportation investment strategy and performance measurement system has
been developed.
This system identifies performance measures and data that gauge progress
toward goals and objectives established by the Commission in each investment
category.
Five investment categories have been established which can measure
performance. Specific objectives are identified within each investment category
to measure progress toward the goals.The investment categories are:
• Safety-Programs that reduce fatalities, injuries and property damage
• System Quality Programs that maintain existing infrastructure
All LOOT programs have been
placed in one of five investment • Mobility-Programs that provide for the movement of people and goods.
categories • Strategic Projects 28 high priority statewide projects.
• Program Delivery- Support functions that enable the delivery of the
program categories listed above.
All CDOT programs have been placed in one of the five investment categories
The System Quality, Safety, and Mobility categories report the effect of
investment decisions on the transportation system. The Strategic Projects
category is specially designed to track the construction of the 28 strategic
projects and related expenditures. The Program Delivery category reports tie
efficiency and effectiveness of CDOT staff in delivering projects and programs
as well as other administrative support functions. It should be noted that, when
20 Strategic Framework
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
♦
completed, each of the 28 strategic projects holds benefits for the Mobility,
Safety and System Quality categories.
Each of the categories includes goals identified by the Transportation
Commission as well as objectives to guide CDOT in achieving these goals.
Performance measures are currently being developed to measure progress in
these objectives.
Safety Investment Category
Goal
• Reduce transportation-related crashes, injuries and fatalities and the
associated loss to society.
Objectives
• Reduce the rate and severity of transportation related incidents
• Promote the education and awareness of safe driving behavior
• Emphasize applicable safety features consistent with the population
growth
System Quality Investment Category
Goals
• Preserve the transportation system
• Keep the system available and safe for travel
Objectives
• Enhance and maintain the transportation system to ensure maximum
useful life
• Preserve and maintain the existing system prior to long term construction
investments
• Develop a "travel friendly" transportation system that incorporates
customer desires
• Ensure that investments into the transportation system sustain and/or
improve quality of life
Mobility Investment Category
Goals
• Improve mobility
♦
Strategic Framework 21
•The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
• Increase travel reliability
Objectives
• Seek external customer feedback to improve functional and regional
delivery of services
• Preserve transportation choices as a part of an integrated statewide
transportation planning process
• Maximize efficiency of the existing infrastructure prior to adding new
capacity
• Ensure environmental stewardship of the transportation system
• Implement transportation improvements that enhance the quality of life
and promote community values
Program Delivery Investment Category
Goals
• Deliver high quality products and service in a timely fashion
• Attract and retain an effective and qualified workforce
• Foster an environment that respects workforce diversity
Objectives
• Maintain fiscal integrity to CDOT through timely encumbrance of funds
and project delivery
• Create a funding environment that preserves the base while pursuing
new sources
• Ensure timely product and service delivery
• Identify innovative human resource solutions that maximize existing
resources to meet business needs
• Create public confidence in departmental accountability
• Incorporate education in project development and implementation
• Develop planning processes that enhance future project development
• Maintain a viable service industry to create a competitive environment
Strategic Proiects Investment Category
Goals
• Accelerate the completion of projects
• Increase investment in the program
• ---�
22 Strategic Framework
♦Tlhe 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.
Objectives
• Promote partnerships with all governments to enhance working
relationships
• Accelerate strategic project delivery while minimizing the impact to all
other objectives
• Prepare transportation needs for Colorado's future
• Preserve options to anticipate Colorado's future transportation needs in
major mobility corridors
• Ensure COOT's bonding eligibility to secure future funding levels
RESOURCEALLOCATION
In the Summer of 1999, the Transportation Commission initiated a review of its
1998 twenty-year revenue projections and resource allocation process. The
results of that effort provided 20-year planning allocations for the purpose of the
statewide transportation plan (2001 — 2020), as well as 6-year programming
projections (2001 — 2006) for updating the Statewide Transportation
Improvement Program(STIP).
Critical components of the Transportation Investment Strategy were being
formulated and therefore not incorporated into the process at that time. However,
the Transportation Commission used performance measures in a limited fashion
as they allocated resources to the Strategic Projects, Statewide Programs, and
Regional Programs. (See diagram on the next page.)
As the "Performance Based Transportation Investment Strategy" is further
developed and additional data is collected, performance measurement will be
more fully integrated into the resource allocation process.
♦ •
Strategic Framework 23
♦ The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
Resource Allocation to Transportation Investment Categories
Total Revenues
Strategic Project Program
Statewide Programs
Surface Treatment Performance Based
Bridge Program Performance Based
Rest Area Program Plan/Performance Based
Noise Barrier Program Plan/Performance Based
Small Urban Program Formula (Population Basedl
Safety Program Plan/Performance Based
Maintenance Program Performance Based
Intelligent Transp. System (ITS) Plan/Performance Based
CDOT Operations Program Actual Budget
Regional Programs
CMAQ Formula Based to Non-attainment Areas
STP Metro Formula to Transp. Management Areas
STP Enhancements Formula
Other Construction Formula
` 45% Vehicle Miles of Travel
40 % Lane Miles
15% Truck Miles of Travel
♦ ----�
24 Strategic Framework
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.
TRANSPORTATIONCOMMISSIONPOLICY DIRECTION AND Transportation Commission Guidance
(pp. 25-28)has been revised from the 7-5-
GUIDANCE 2000 draft to reflect Transportation
Comnssion response to the public
The Transportation Commission has provided specific direction to guide CDOT comments received.
as it plans and develops the state transportation system. This section highlights
the most pertinent policy direction and guidance provided by the Commission.
IRAN SPORTATI ONCOM M I SSI ONPOLI CY
Bicycle Shoulder Policy
The 2015 Statewide Transportation Plan identified a system of High Priority
Bicycle Corridors. The Highway Shoulder Policy directs that shoulders on high
priority bicycle corridors meet the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) bicycle standards and shoulder
improvements should be part of roadway improvement projects.
The Commission has also directed that a high tier of priority bicycle corridors be
identified to potentially help focus limited resources to those facilities with the
greatest need and benefit. The Commission's Intermodal Committee is refining
this map for consideration by the full Commission at a later date.
Rail Corridor Preservation Policy
The Rail Corridor Preservation Policy recognizes the important role that rail
corridors play in the current and future transportation system. The policy adopted
by the Commission defines criteria for the selection of "State Significant Rail
Corridors", and identifies activities which CDOT may take to preserve these
corridors for future transportation uses.
Draft rail corridors of state significance, based on the criteria identified in this
policy, are identified on the map on page 59.
TRANSPORTATIONCOM MISSI ONGU IDAN CE
Transportation Integration
The Transportation Commission recognizes and will support the various roles of
cur planning partners, and of transportation providers, in coordinating an
integrated intermodal transportation system for Colorado.
Flexible Funding for Alternative Modes
The Transportation Commission recognizes the role of alternative modes in
addressing mobility needs. Tc that end, the Commission supports using Other
Ftegional Priority funds for alternative mode projects that benefit the state's
highway system and are prioritized through the regional planning process.
• ♦
Strategic Framework 25
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future•
Further, the Commission supports utilizing federal and Senate Bill 99-I funding
flexibility on strategic projects; and supports modal flexibility for existing and new
transportation revenues within constitutional, legislative and regulatory
constraints and Commission program priorities.
Sharing of Transportation Revenues with Local Governments
The Commission recognizes the significant demands placed on local
governments to provide and maintain municipal and county roads and bridges.
Therefore,the Commission supports continued sharing, as prescribed by existing
formula of the Highway User Tax Fund (HUTF)and any increases to the HUTF.
In addition, the Commission supports sharing new sources of voter approved
statewide transportation revenues with local governments.
Tiering the Transportation System
The Transportation Commission recognizes the value of a tiered transportation
system to aid in optimizing investment and supports the development of
performance objectives appropriate to the role facilities play in the transportation
system. Therefore, the Commission directs staff, working with transportation
system stakeholders, to refine the adopted State Significant Corridors based on
transportation investment and asset management programs.
Corridor Optimization / Corridor Alternative Analysis Planning
Procedures
The Transportation Commission has directed that procedures to evaluate
alternatives for corridor improvements on state highways be updated to ensure
the most efficient use is made of available resources and opportunities in the
corridor planning process.
The Commission also requested that their role in corridor planning be better
defined. To improve coordination, the Commission has directed that any corridor
study affecting the state highway system receive their approval prior to study
recommendations being implemented.
Growth in the State Transportation System
Given current resources the Transportation Commission will continue its high
priority on preservation, enhancement, and maintenance of the existing
infrastructure. However, the Commission recognizes that judicious expansion of
the state transportation system may be necessary to respond to projected
growth. Expansion may include increases in current corridor capacity, addition of
new corridors, or redesignation of local roads. Additions to the state system are
contingent on the availability of funds, an exchange of facilities with local
•
26 Strategic Framework
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future♦
governments or partnerships with public and private entities.Any additions to the
state system must be consistent with the role and function of the state highway
system.
Telecommunications
The Transportation Commission recognizes the important role of
telecommunications in the state, and understands that telecommunications may
have significant implications for the state's transportation system in the future.
The Commission also recognizes that development of the telecommunications
system is primarily the responsibility of the private sector. Therefore, the
Commission does not intend to compete with the private sector in providing
telecommunication service to the general public.
To that end, CDOT telecommunication activities will be restricted to the
deployment of Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) projects and programs,
and in partnership with the private sector, providing telecommunications
infrastructure to CDOT facilities statewide.
Regarding the role of ITS within the regional and statewide transportation
planning process, Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) and Regional
Planning Commissions (RPCs) are encouraged to consider ITS projects within
their regional transportation plans and transportation-related ITS projects are
eligible to compete for Other Regional Priority funds. The Commission supports
commitment to coordination and planning among the state, local governments,
and private providers.
Transit Policy Guidance
The Transportation Commission recognizes that transit is an integral component
of Colorado's transportation system as it benefits mobility by providing an
alternative to congested roads, options for travel, energy savings, and
environmental benefits. The Commission recognizes transit's role in providing
transportation to jobs, medical services, and educational institutions for people
who may not have access to a car or may be unable to drive. Therefore, the
Transportation Commission supports the development of new funding sources to
supplement local transit capital needs and fund intermodal projects that benefit
the state's transportation system.
Environmental Policy Guidance
The Transportation Commission supports pro-active techniques to mitigate
impacts of the transportation system on the environment by developing creative
strategies that:
• Comprehensively address anticipated environmental impacts of the state
transportation system;
// •—
Strategic Framework 27
♦ The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
• Consider project enhancements in affected communities in a cost
effective manner consistent with the mission of the Department, and,
• Expedite project development.
Small Urban Program
The Transportation Commission recognizes the concern from Small Urban Fund
recipients that the program will expire in 2004. The Commission wit form a
subcommittee of its members in 2001 to re-evaluate the Small Urban Program
and receive input from the Statewide Transportation Advisory Committee
(STAC). The subcommittee of the Transportation Commission will report back r)
the full Transportation Commission prior to the program's 2004 expiration date
SUMMARY
The challenge embodied in this transportation plan is clear. With the limited
resources available, the Commission must work with citizens throughout the
state to balance increasing demand for mobility due to a growing population with
the need to maintain the existing transportation system.
The Commission believes that we all must work creatively and in partnership to
maximize the efficiency of the existing transportation system and preserve the
existing system before adding new capacity.
♦ —.4
28 Strategic Framework
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.
SOCIOECONOMIC AND Socioeconomic and Environments'
Portrait(pp. 29-56)has been revised from
ENVIRONMENTAL PORTRAIT the 05-21100 draft to include the latest
graphic projections.
Transportation is about movement between origins and destinations, such as
getting children to school, people to work, goods to market, tourists to
recreational areas, or information to users. Therefore, a transportation plan must
take into consideration pertinent geographic, demographic, and economic factors
in order to understand the need for transportation improvements.
Colorado is part of the western United States, surrounded by the states of
Wyoming, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Arizona, and Utah.
Colorado is approximately midway between the nation's borders, with Canada to
the north and Mexico to the south. With the signing of the North American Free
Trade Agreement (NAFTA), attention has focused on how goods will move most
effectively between the three partnering nations. Two of Colorado's neighboring
slates, Wyoming and New Mexico, reference their relationship to this north-south
trade corridor in their long-range transportation plans:
"Wyoming should continue to be involved in transportation developments
along the Front Range of the Rocky Mountains. Access to Denver
International Airport will be important to Wyoming's economy."
- Wyoming's Statewide Long-Range Plan
"New Mexico is planning for and strongly supporting the development of
a major international transportation facility at Santa Teresa[1-25 I I-10).
Since New Mexico contains two of the nation's major East/West
commerce routes (I-10 and 1-40) and connects both to a primary
NorthlSouth route (I-25) the impact of commercial traffic on both highway
and rail systems is enormous. This impact will in all likelihood increase
significantly with the commercial development associated with NAFTA."
-New Mexico Long-Range Comprehensive Transportation Plan.
CONNECTINGCOLORADO
In the rapidly developing global marketplace, Colorado's strategic assets need to
be strengthened through appropriate infrastructure investments. Colorado has
participated in several studies focusing on key corridors, including the Heartland
Expressway, Western Transportation and Trade Network(WTTN), TransAmerica
Feasibility Study, and the Ports to Plains Corridor, etc. CDOT is initiating a
mobility study to determine the feasibility of existing and possible future
transportation corridors and intermodal terminals in eastern Colorado. These.
studies are excellent tools to aid in the development of the "big picture" and long-
range views necessary to prepare Colorado in future endeavors. It is important to
prioritize investments to achieve our goals of economic vitality and maintaining
the excellent quality of life that Colorado's residents and visitors have come to
expect.
Socioeconomic & Environmental Portrait 29
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
OTHER SOURCES
In addition to regional transportation plans, several other sources have been
utilized in this chapter, including the 1990 Census, the Colorado Division of Local
Governments State Demographer's Office, and the Department of Labor and
Employment. Information has been gathered from several surveys conducted on
behalf of the Department of Transportation by Talmey-Drake (1992), University
of Colorado — Denver (1994), In-Motion, Inc. with Talmey-Drake (1997), and
URS Greiner Woodward-Clyde with National Research Center (2000).. This plan
is being completed before the new Census (2000) information will be available
The regional and statewide transportation planning update cycle, however, is
cyclical, and the Census (2000) information will be utilized in the next: cycle as
the Metropolitan Planning Organizations and the Regional Planning
Commissions begin updating their plans to the 2025 planning horizon.
• ---1
30 Socioeconomic& Environmental Portrait
•—• 2020 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.
Statewide Demographic Characteristics
Colorado's population grew at an average annual rate of 2.25% between 1990
and 1998. Compared to the national average of 1.08%, this is a significant rate of
growth. Colorado will continue to experience a steady growth pace, reaching a
projected 5.9 million people by 2020.
Colorado Population Projections*
For transportation planning purposes it is important to understand the
characteristics, such as physical, socio-economic, travel, etc. of our population. Colorado will grow o 5.9 million
With this information the 2020 Plan can address the implications that these people by 2020 wfh o projected
characteristics have on our transportation infrastructure and service needs, average annual growth rate of 2.7%
currently, and in the future.
The total state population is expected to reach 5.9 million by 2020. Of the
projected 5.9 million Coloradans, 3% are expected to be residing in the Eastern
Plains, 83% along the Front Range, and 14% on the Western Slope.
Colorado Population Projections 1990-7 0
r.o00.000 mm, tt 'i Pam
e,0000ao w° �
6,000000 ° � —
4.000000 _ •., '•
].000000 ..
2.000 000 ( ""m =;
1.000000 ,s_ a�-k "`1,13
0
1990 2000 2010 2020
Years
With the projected increase in population, highway congestion, and its related
environmental problems, such as air pollution, are major concerns. Information
from the 1997 Mobility Survey indicated that 73% of the public felt it had gotten
more difficult to get to where they wanted to go and 58% cited road and highway
problems as the number one reason why. Traffic congestion was specifically
mentioned by 40% of the survey respondents. Furthermore, according to the
1999 Transit Needs and Benefits Study, only 44% of Colorado's transit needs
are being met.
All demographic pmjec/ions in this section p epared by The Center for Business and
Economic Forecasting fortheDemography section
of the Colorado Depadment of Local
Affairs
•
Socioeconomic& Environmental Portrait 31
• The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
♦
Average Annual Growth (map)
Average Annual Growth discussion and
map have been added since the 7-5-2000 The map below shows Colorado's total growth and average annual population
draft in response to public comment. growth from 1990 to 2020. Growth in total population is concentrated in the Front
Range Area, the 1-70 West corridor and La Plata County. Growth rates in some
rural areas will continue to be quite high, adding pressure to existing
infrastructure.
Average Annual Growth in the Number of People Between 1990 and 2020
2.4% 1
1.6% 35% 1.8% 1.0%
A ti I Average Annual
- — 24% Number of New
sk.53% Residents Ea
23°/ ch
or/. 1.0% Year Between
't % 1990 and 2020
EE 0.%1"1000
24X y i � 3
07% 9212 001 2999
2Y6 000•10000
- 3
z°
3 %
35%
n tix ihawse in Population
5.r/ * '" 1e90Thoigh2020
__5 % 499. 25% 1.3% 2.5%
26% 0.7%
/-'—^— 2r/ 29X
/ 1.3% I 2.3 //p\
289. ` / 24% 03% /i�l
an. 0.8% ` 1.1%
60 0 6D 12) 180 240 Mies Date Produced September 21,2000
• --II
32 Socioeconomic& Environmental Portrait
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.
AGING POPULATION
Between 1990 and 2020 the 65 years or older age group will become a larger
segment of the state's population as baby-boomers age, life-expectancy
increases, and retirees move into the state. in addition, those sixteen years old
or younger will continue to comprise nearly a quarter of the state's population in
2020. Each of the three geographic regions reflects a fairly consistent division
among age groups statewide—on average 23%of the population will be in the 0-
16 age group, 64% will be 17-64, and 13%will be 65 and older.
Change in Age Groups
1990-2020
100% / 10% }fir 13% .
� O 65 + Years
50% r ■17-64 Years
N
a o O0-16 Years
0%
1990 2020
Year
Change in Age Groups
Both the over 65-age group and the 0-16 age group are cited in several regional
transportation plans as 'transportation dependent.' Public transportation is
critical to meeting the accessibility needs of the elderly, as well as those too
young to drive.
Transportation concerns that arise among the aging population include the ability
to adequately see roadway signs and markings — both in the daytime and after
dark, reaction time, maintaining speeds consistent with the flow of traffic, etc.
Transportation concerns regarding young, less experienced, drivers include
speeding and aggressive driving.
• •
Socioeconomic& Environmental Portrait 33
. The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
POPULATION WITIIVIOBILITYLIMITATION
The 1990 Census identifies 76,847 Coloradans as having a mobility limitation.
People were identified as having a mobility limitation if they had a long-lasting
health condition that made it difficult to go outside the home alone. Two
examples of outside activities on the questionnaire included shopping and
visiting the doctors office. The Transit Needs and Benefits Study, comfdeted m
1999, provided projections of disabled persons for 2000 and 2020. The number
of persons with a mobility limitation will more than double between 1!190 and
2020.
Mobility Limitation
Mobility Limitation
1990-2020
250,000 z"" — . r
200000 a3, a 2; ->. ,...� .s
Co
c 150,000 s..,, . s
-._
N
a 100,000
50,000 EL
0
1990 2000
2020
Years
----•
•
34 Socioeconomic& Environmental Portrait
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future*
Population in Households without Vehicles
According to 1990 Census information, 7% of Colorado's occupied housing units
reported not having a vehicle available. The percentages change dramatically,
however, when adding the racial/ethnic component. Thirteen percent of Hispanic
households and 20% of Black households reported not having a vehicle
available. The percentage of households without vehicles increases when
poverty level status is factored into the equation.
Comparison of Households Without Vehicles Available
1990
60% a t � J
50% .
• 30% _
q�-�—w M ®Households without Vehicles
a-• 20% M
o _ ■Poverty Level Households
without Vehicles
0%
White Hispanic Black
Although poverty among certain population groups in Colorado is declining, the
financial ability to own and operate a car appears to be dramatically lower(34%)
among the lowest income groups(under$20,000 per year) according to the 1997
CDOT Mobility Survey.This same survey had 56% of the respondents agree that
the state has a responsibility to provide transportation to people who don't own a
car or who physically can't drive. Several of the transportation planning regions
around the state have developed Access to Jobs/Reverse Commute Plans to
better analyze the needs of residents who have transportation-related obstacles
in terms of accessing the job market. One of the programs funded under the
federal Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) provides grants
to assist implementing the regional Access to Jobs/Reverse Commute Plans.
Similarly, the transportation planning process at both the regional and state level,
must continue to develop and refine its ability to ensure fair treatment and
meaningful involvement of all people, regardless of race, color, national origin,or
income. Fair treatment means that no group of people should bear a
disproportionate share of negative consequences of transportation programs.
Additional information on these issues is contained in Apoendix B of this
document.
• ♦
Socioeconomic& Environmental Portrait 35
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Non: Investing in Colorado's Future•
LABOR ANDECONOMICGROWTH
The state's employment is currently strong, and with a well-educated, technically
trained workforce, Colorado expects to remain well-positioned to attract and
maintain business and industry. Since the majority of these workers travel to their
place of employment in their own vehicle (77% based on the 1997 Mobility
survey results),roadway congestion will continue to be a concern.
Projected Labor Force and Employed Persons
Projected Labor Farce and Employed Persons
1990-2020
35W,00O gg' t-r x ref j
3,000,000
zsa0000
—
c 200:1,0 00 _ • ■Employed Rasa'ss
m 1500.000 I L.aborForce
1,000,000 (:
500000 ' - *-
199() 1985 2010 2010 2020
Yeas
COLORADdS CHANGING ECONOMY
Colorado's economy has been changing. Mining, once a major industry, has
declined since 1998. On the other hand, growth in the Service Industry and
Retail Trade leads all other sectors during the same time period. These sectors
in particular, have significant impacts on our transportation system and needs.
Transportation related impacts include the growing number of trps per
household, heavier reliance on using the single occupant vehicle for traveling to
work for the convenience of making other service oriented trips, and longer trips
or accessibility problems for service workers (particularly in lower paying service
jobs).
♦ ----1
36 Socioeconomic&Environmental Portrait
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future♦
Employment by Sector
Employment by Sector
1985 - 1998
Services
Finance,Insurance&Real Estate "
Retail Trade
Wholesale Trade
Transp,Comm,Utilities
Manufacturing
Construction =r,s
Mining "°sar,r- r n '%X,
Agricultural Products&Services Etx ; ma �,;,wmro-s,=,.,�,
100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000
® 1985 ■ 1998
♦ ♦
Socioeconomic& Environmental Portrait 37
•The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
COLORADdS THREE GEOGRAPHICAREAS
Colorado is very diverse and can be divided into three primary area;,
characterized by distinct geographical and demographic variations:
▪ The more agricultural, low density, plains area of Eastern Colorado.
• The urbanized corridor along the Rocky Mountain Front Range.
• The combination of tourist/recreational/high growth areas, expansive federal
lands, and agricultural/ranching areas of the Western Slope.
The following general overview of the state is provided as a backdrop for
examining specific demographic and economic information for each of the three
regions of the state. The regional portraits provide an opportunity to discuss how
unique geographic situations affect the transportation system in these areas. The
TPR plans developed within these regions provide the best source of information
describing these areas.
Colorado's Three Geographic Areas (map)
d
NORT tiEST ay: „ .:
(Ir duy
al v
it
,,. ear .:,
g S-b uY �.um,• :
g nritJ h ^kr��K �` w t
X'g M ^'
i ,11,14;,,,,t, i
GUNNISOV '*P ti •4^ ^M'•t?+.'�'r ``"Th .. a Y A j efi5
,7,J,,,, vE 4,i r- �NTRAL �.` „ '�'M1.. +} r�;„k;r-"ws—�� alip
ur � ."tS $ ?Pr v
SO(TTFM£S7` :�, iliCENTRAL t 0.
'+ r ,r„ ,i le,dig +r.,l 4 • i �`
• _-_♦
38 Socioeconomic& Environmental Portrait
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.
!JISTERNPIAINSAREA Eastern Plains Area(pp. 3942)ha be:n
revised from the 7-5-2000 draft for
The Eastern Plains area includes the Southeast, Eastern and South Central consistency in presentation with the groin
TPRs.The area lies primarily east of Interstate 25. Range and Western Slope regions.
Description
The largest TPR in the geographic area is the Eastern TPR, located on the
northern and east-central plains of Colorado. The TPR is composed of nine
counties: Cheyenne; Elbert; Kit Carson; Lincoln; Logan; Phillips; Sedgwick;
Yuma; and, Washington. The Eastern TPR has two multi-county regional
organizations,the Northeastern Colorado Association of Local Governments and
the East Central Council of Governments. According to the Regional
Transportation Plan, `The area is pnman/y rural in nature and has a large
agricultural base.'The southern portion of the TPR is primarily dryland farming
whereas the northern end is mostly irrigated cropland, dry farmland and
grassland. Eastern Plains
Average Annual Growth
The Southeastern TPR, which is just south of the Eastern TPR, is comprised of 1990-2020
13aca, Bent, Crowley, Kiowa, Otero and Prowers counties. This area centers on
the Lower Arkansas Valley in southeastern Colorado. The region is generally Eastern 3.3%
characterized as "a large, sparsely populated area with an economy based in Southeastern 1.0%
agncu/ture." South Central 2.6%
The South Central TPR is located along the southern border of the state and is Region 2.2%
comprised of two counties, Huerfano and Las Animas. In the regional plan, the Colorado 2.7%
counties are characterized by small-town urban to sparse settled rural
development pattern? The area was settled early with an economy based in
mining.Today the TPR has a strong service economy.
Demographics
The overall population of the Eastern Plains is expected to increase annually at
an average rate of 2.2% between 1990 and 2020, slightly less than the state
average. By the year 2020, the population in this region is projected to be
218,606, a 67% increase from 1990. Thirteen percent of the Eastern Plains
2020 population will be 65 years or older, down from 17% in 1990. Similarly, the
percent of population less than 17 years of age will decrease from 26% in 1990
to 22% in 2020. The percent of the Eastern Plains' population 17 to 64 years is
expected to increase from 57% in 1990 to 65% in 2020. Although the
percentage in the 0-16 and 65 years or older are expected to decrease between
1990 and 2020, the number of people within these age groups will increase
significantly by 2020.
The percent of Eastern Plains' 1990 households without vehicles matches the
state's 7%. However, the South Central TPR has the highest percent of
•
Socioeconomic& Environmental Portrait 39
♦ The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future♦
households without vehicles (12%) not only within the Easterr Plains bit also
within Colorado.
Regional Economy
The area's labor force is expected to grow from 68,907 persons in 1990 to
approximately 124,934 by 2020, an 81% increase. In 1990, most of the labor
force was employed in the agriculture sector; however, by 1998 the majority
shifted to wholesale and retail trade. Eighty percent of the Eastern Plains
residents are employed in the agricultural, wholesale and retail trade, services
and government sectors. The unemployment rate for the Eastern Plains was 4%
in 1998, the same as it was in 1990. Per capita income rose 23% from $15,873
in 1990 to $19,524 in 1997. This growth may have been a result of the
availability of higher paying employment opportunities.
Activity Centers
The Eastern Plains has a variety of activity centers for both residents and
tourists,which also serve as focal points for transportation services. Each TPR in
the Eastern Plains identified different sets of facilities as major activity centers,
reflecting their unique circumstances. These activity centers may be recreational,
social service, commercial, institutional, educational, or health care centers, In
the Southeast TPR, for example, shopping centers such as K-Mart, Wal-Mart,
and the County Market serve as activity centers for the residents and businesses
in the area. The Corazon de Trinidad Historical District, in the South Central
TPR, is one of the major activity centers enjoyed by residents and tourists
travelling along 1-25 into the state.
Students attending higher education institutions account for some of the reported
increase in population in the 17 to 64 age group. Many students live permanently
in the college communities while others are temporary residents only residing in
the area during the school term. Three state-supported secondary schools are
available in the area.
Storage facilities, loading facilities, and feedlots are located in every community
in the Eastern TPR. All of these facilities are important to the distribution of
agricultural products. The large volume and bulk of the agricultural products
makes rail the most efficient mode of transport. The Cargill and Emherst grain
elevators generate the most traffic, demonstrating the importance in the
continuation and preservation of rail lines in Eastern Colorado.
The Colorado Department of Corrections is one of the largest employers in the
Eastern TPR, with two prison facilities, including the state's first'Mega-prison" in
located in Logan County, outside of Sterling and another just outsice
Walsenburg. The Sterling facility alone employs nearly 1,000 people, which has
resulted in housing shortages and increased traffic. Consequently. many
♦ ---�
40 Socioeconomic& Environmental Portrait
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.
employees of the prison now commute from outlying communities. Another new
prison facility is also being constructed in the Eastern Plains, just a few miles
east of Trinidad on SH 160.
Scenic attractions promote significant visitor traffic annually. Routes such as the
Highway of Legends Scenic Byway, the Santa Fe Trail and the South Platte
River Trail provide recreational and educational benefits to residents and tourists.
Also, state parks, including North Sterling, Bonny Lake, Lathrop, as well as
Trinidad Reservoir and Bent's Old Fort National Historic Site, provide
recreational activities for both residents and tourists.
Recreational park and tourist attractions, such as these, generate large volumes
of traffic from residents and state visitors. In 1998, the total estimated number of
visitors to these state parks was 675,081. The majority of visits to these facilities
occur during the summer season. The National Forest Service's Comanche
National Grassland, once home to the Comanche Indians and other nomadic
tribes, covers some 435,000 acres in Baca, Otero and Las Animas Counties.
Transportation Impacts
Just as VMT increased 28% from 1990 to 1998 in the Eastern Plains, the
projected increase in population will contribute to higher VMT in the area. Also,
because of the agricultural nature of the eastem plains, the economy depends
greatly on the ability of commercial vehicles to transport large amounts of
agricultural products. Consequently, issues such as safety, roadway surface
condition, and congestion/delay were important considerations for this region in
the Eastern TPR, trucks comprise 29% of the total vehicles on state highways,
followed by the South Central and Southeast TPRs' with 21% and 23%,
respectively.
By 2020, youth under the age of 17 and persons 65 years or older will
account for 35% of the Eastern Plain's total population. The requirements of
these transportation dependent groups, in terms of design and demand for
alternative modes, were considered in the regional transportation plans prepared
in this region.
For parts of the Eastern Plains it may not be a question of the absence of
transportation options for transit dependent populations, but rather a matter of
limited service, staff, access, and hours. It is imperative that both public and
private transportation providers work together in small urban centers and rural
areas to ensure that more transit needs are met.
Another transportation issue facing the Eastern Plains is the preservation and
continued development of freight rail projects. The agricultural economy depends
on the ability to transport products from farm to marketplace; many of the
Eastern Plains communities rely on the economic advantage that the rail lines
provide and support preservation efforts and continued development. Failure to
♦ ♦
Socioeconomic& Environmental Portrait 41
♦ The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future♦
preserve abandoned railroad right-of-way corridors and to avoid further
abandonment of rights-of-way may mean economic hardship for the region.
The Eastern Plains TPRs consider the enhancement of their av ation component
in their Regional Transportation Plans essential for several reasons. First,a need
exists for expanded air ambulance service, including helipor locations. This
emergency health service is critical to the well being of the area's senior
population.
Second, increased air freight and passenger air service is important because it
would provide more communities in the Eastern Plains with social, economic,
and transport opportunities. Loss of air service by United Express in the small
urban center of Lamar has resulted in increased dependency on ground
transportation. As the Eastem Plains becomes more populated and tourism
increases, aviation can play a more significant role in the transportation of goods
and people to this part of Colorado.
Bicycling and walking have become increasingly popular in the area as
Coloradans integrate these activities into their daily lives. The Eastern Plains'
communities and recreational areas view the integration and promotion of
pedestrian and bicycle routes as an important aspect of their regional
transportation plans. Because of the rural nature of the Eastern Plains,
pedestrians' needs are primarily localized, with limited bicycle and pedestrian
facilities. Concerns continue to be expressed about adequate: shoulders and
other safety issues.
Summary
As the Eastern Plains continues to grow in population, there is a greater need for
transportation options. As income rises, past studies indicate households will be
more receptive to purchase a vehicle for the majority of trips. This increase in
vehicle ownership will necessitate the need for maintaining access roads to jobs
and activity centers. Growth in transit dependent populations indicates a
continuing need for local public transportation services. With a significant portion
of its economy still in agriculture, efficient movement of goods by truck and rail
are critical considerations in the regional transportation planning process.
FRONT RANGEAREA
Front Range Area(pp. 4246)has been
revised from the 7-5-20(X)draft for The Front Range Region is located in the central portion of Colorado, partly in
consistency in presentation with the Eastern
Plains and Western Slope regions. the Rocky Mountains and partly on the plains, bisected by I-25 from north to
south. Transportation Planning Regions (TPRs) located within this area include:
Pueblo, Upper Front Range, North Front Range, Greater Denver Area, Pike's
Peak Area,and Central Front Range.
♦ ---♦
42 Socioeconomic& Environmental Portrait
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
♦
Description
The Pueblo Transportation Region (Pueblo County) and the city of Pueblo are
located along the Colorado Front Range approximately 110 miles south of
Denver and 42 miles south of Colorado Springs. This TPR also includes several
small towns and metropolitan districts such as Boone, Avondale, Beulah, Pueblo
West, Colorado City and Rye. 1-25 bisects the county as well as the city of
Pueblo and serves as the primary transportation route for north-south activities in
the state. The interstate also serves a significant amount of locally generated
traffic travelling within the city and county.
Front Range
The Upper Front Range TPR is located in north-central Colorado and is Average Annual Growth
comprised of Latimer, Morgan and Weld counties, excluding the urbanized 1990-2020
portions of Larimer and Weld. This TPR is primarily rural, but many small to --
moderately sized communities are included in the planning area. The region Upper Front Range 3.7%
represents a wide diversity of conditions. The northern and eastern areas are Pikes Peak/Central 2 8%
primarily rural. The southern portion of the region is also primarily rural, but is Front Range
heavily influenced by the growth in the Denver area. The western part of the Pueblo 1.6%
region is mountainous, and is significantly affected by tourism.
Greater Denver Area 2.2%
The Greater Denver Area is not only the largest TPR in the Front Range, it is Region _ 2.6%
also the most populated area of the state. Comprised of eight counties—Adams, Colorado 2.7%
Arapahoe,Boulder,Clear Creek, Denver, Douglas, Gilpin and Jefferson.
The North Front Range includes the more populous portions of Larimer and Weld
counties. The TPR includes the cities of Fort Collins, Greeley, and Loveland and
the towns of Berthoud, Evans, Garden City, Johnstown, LaSalle, Timnath and
Windsor.
The Pikes Peak Region is the second largest metropolitan area in the state.
Located 60 miles south of Denver, the area is comprised of the communities of
Colorado Springs, Monument, Fountain, Widefield/Security, Manitou Springs,
Green Mountain Falls, Woodland Park, Palmer Lake, and portions of El Paso
and Teller counties. Terrain in the area ranges from high plain to mountainous.
The Central Front Range is comprised of Custer, Park and Fremont counties, as
well as the rural portions of El Paso and Teller counties. The area is
geographically diverse with plains, mountains,valleys and canyons, but is unified
by its proximity to the populous Front Range.
Demographics
The most populous in the state, the Front Range Region is projected to grow
from 2.8 million people in 1990 to nearly 4.9 million in 2020. This is a 78% total
increase over the 30-year period, with an average annual increase of 2.6%. The
greatest rates of change are expected in Park,Douglas, and Teller Counties.
• ♦
Socioeconomic& Environmental Portrait 43
♦ The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future♦
From 1990 to 2020, the Front Range population in the 65 years and older group
is projected to grow by 177%. Similarly, the youth under 17 years of age group
will increase by 70%. The 17 to 64 year old population group is projected to
decrease from 66% in 1990 to 63% in 2020. Although the percentage in this age
group decreases from 1990 to 2020, the total number of people in this age group
will increase significantly by 2020.
The percent of Front Range households without a vehicle (1990 data) matches
the state's 7%. However, the Pueblo TPR had 10% of its 1990 households
without a vehicle available and the Greater Denver TPR had 8%.
Regional Economy
The Front Range Region not only has the largest population in the state, but it
also has the most jobs in the state. The number of people employed in 1990 for
this Region totaled 1.5 million and is projected to grow to 2.5 million in the year
2020, a 66% increase in employment. In most parts of the Front Range Region
the services industry was the dominant sector in both 1990 and it 1998,
according to the Colorado State Department of Labor an Employment. Also, the
rural parts of the Upper Front Range TPR show agriculture and related industries
to still be important. Unemployment in the Front Range Region decreased from
5% in 1990 to 4% in 1998, matching the state's unemployment statistics for the
same time frame.
Activity Centers
Many activity centers are found along the Front Range Regior and draw people
locally, regionally and nationally.Activity centers in this Region include:the major
business districts in the urban areas of Denver, Boulder, Longmont, Fort Collins,
Greeley, Loveland, Colorado Springs and Pueblo. Suburban-type business
districts such as the Denver Technical Center and Interlocken also attract
numerous weekday trips. Military or govemment employment centers such as
the Federal Center in Denver the Air Force Academy and Fort Carson in
Colorado Springs are also major trip attractors. Add to these, institution of higher
education, shopping centers, including outlet malls, prisons, nursing homes,
historic sites, zoos, museums, resorts, sports centers, concert and entertainment
facilities and gambling casinos. In addition, there are many seasonal events,
such as the annual State Fair in Pueblo, the National Western Stock Show in
Denver and annual craft shows in several areas, which take place at regular
times of the year in the same locations.
The historic mining communities of Central City, Black Hawk, and Cripple Creek
have undergone an economical transformation with the advent of limited stakes
gaming in 1991. These three towns have become popular gambling destinations
for tourists and residents alike. However, increased traffic flow has impacted the
rural highways significantly. For example, at the junction of SH 119 and US 6
♦ ---♦
44 Socioeconomic& Environmental Portrait
71he 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
♦
near Central City and Black Hawk, the average daily traffic (ADT) has increased
from 3050 in 1991 to 15,632 in 1999. This reflects a 413% increase in ADT.
Cripple Creek has also seen an increase in traffic flow along SH 24 —from 7050
ADT in 1991 to 16,392 ADT in 1999, a 133% increase. These increases mean
more stress on the roadways, requiring additional maintenance and facility
improvements.
Throughout the Front Range Region outdoor recreational attractions are plentiful.
There are numerous state parks, BLM lands, U.S. Forest Service land,
reservoirs, wilderness areas, a National Park, and the Pawnee National
Grassland. Several national forests can also be found bordering the western
portion of the Front Range Region including Arapahoe, San Isabel, Pike, and
Roosevelt.
Rocky Mountain National Park near Estes Park in Larimer County is very
popular, with over three million visitors reported in 1998. Estes Park is a small
community with a large number of Rocky Mountain National Park visitors passing
through the area. Adequately managing the traffic is important to this community.
A popular way to access Rocky Mountain National Park is to drive along the
scenic Peak-to-Peak Byway passing by the Indian Peaks Wilderness area just
northwest of Boulder.
Numerous state parks can be found throughout the area. During the 1998-1999
time period, the Colorado State Parks and Outdoor Recreation reported
5,852,981 visitors to the 16 state parks in the Front Range Region. State parks
reported more than one million visitors to Cherry Creek State Park in the Greater
Denver Area and Pueblo State Park in Pueblo County.
Transportation Impacts
Primarily urban, this area's greatest challenges center around growth, land
development decisions and congestion management. As population increases,
so do VMT, which has increased 38.1% along the Front Range from 1990 to
1998. The increased VMT is not only attributed to population growth, but also to
increases in vehicle trip length, reduction in vehicle occupancy, increased person
trips per capita,and increased recreation and tourism traffic.
Congestion throughout the Front Range region is of predominant concern,
particularly with air quality problems existing in three of the metropolitan areas.
Congestion in the Front Range occurs more frequently and for longer durations
than elsewhere in the state. The daily commute by workers traveling within and
between the urbanized areas along the Front Range has prompted multi-modal
solutions such as light rail lines, bus/High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes on
freeway and expressway segments, regional bus service, vanpools, travel
demand management techniques, etc. Also being given serious consideration is
commuter rail along the Front Range corridor of I-25 and west along 1-70.
♦
Socioeconomic& Environmental Portrait 45
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
•
In addition to the mobility related demands within the Front Range, effective
operation of the existing transportation system is an important planning
consideration,as well as maintaining the existing transportation system
The projected increase in the transportation dependent population groups
supports the need to increase public transportation services available to the
elderly. The unemployment rates for several areas within the Front Range
region warrant consideration of programs to provide access to jobs.
Being a predominant market center for the state raises issues related to efficient
movement of goods within and through the region. Multimodal transportation
facilities with appropriate intermodal connections are important to meet the
diverse trip demand in the Front Range region. The Denver International Airport
and Colorado Springs Airport play a significant role in the Front Range economy
and beyond. Creating effective linkages from airports to the remainder of the
region and state for both people and goods is vital.
Freight rail lines paralleling 1-25 through the Front Range region continue to be
considered for passenger movement potential. Studies have provided pertinent
information regarding the feasibility of this option, however, it would most likely
occur in the event of abandonment by freight providers in the corridor.
Due to the increased interest in nonmotorized modes of transportation by the
population, bicycle and pedestrian needs have been given consideration through
the regional transportation plans. Local and regional facilities continue to be
developed to provide for both transportation-related and recreational trips.
Summary
Population projections forecast continued growth for the Front Range. As the
population continues to increase, the challenge will be to provide efficient
transportation systems for those who reside in the region. Creating additional
alternative modes of transportation is a priority for Front Range residents.
Congestion from the reliance on the single occupancy vehicle and dealing with
the transportation needs of growing transportation dependent segments of the
population are two reasons why alternative transportation systems should be
explored. Adequate transportation systems will help promote a strong economy
by allowing people better accessibility to recreational, business, residential, and
commercial opportunities.
WESTERNSLOPEAREA
Western Slope Area(pp.46-50)has been
revised from the 7-5-2000 draft for The Rocky Mountains physically separate the Western Slope from tine Front
consistency in presentation with the Eastern Range and Eastern Plains. Travelling to the Western Slope from the Eastern
Plains.and Front Range regions. Plains or Front Range areas means negotiating high mountain passes over the
• ---♦
46 Socioeconomic&Environmental Portrait
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future*
Continental Divide such as Loveland, Berthoud, Monarch, and Wolf Creek. In the
past, several narrow gauge rail lines were constructed over the Divide and
historically played a key role in moving commodities. Over the last several
decades roadway travel between the Western Slope and the remainder of the
state was greatly enhanced by the construction of 1-70, including the Eisenhower
Tunnel and the major improvements through the scenic Glenwood Canyon. 1-70
is the primary east-west route through Colorado and regardless of its interstate
status and improvements, the mountainous portion of 1-70 continues to pose
freight and passenger-related obstacles such as weather, geographical
limitations, and steep grades. The Western Slope's roadway system is more
skeletal than the rest of the state, meaning fewer alternate route options and
circuitous routes, contributing to extended travel times or lengthy delays when
road closures occur.
Description
The Western Slope has one urbanized area, Grand Junction in Mesa County.
This urbanized area provides services to many smaller towns and communities
including shopping, higher education, medical services, access to passenger rail, Western Slope
intercity bus,and commercial aviation services.
Average Annual Growth
The Southwest TPR is uniquely situated in the "Four Comers" area, along with 1990-2020
northwest New Mexico, southeast Utah, and northeast Arizona. The Southwest
TPR has several small urban centers (5,000 to 50,000), including Durango and Gunnison Valle 7
Cortez. This TPR also encompasses tribal lands belonging to the Southern Ute Southwest 6%
Indian Tribe and the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe. Northwest 1%
The Northwest TPR has two small urban centers, Steamboat Springs and Craig. Intermountain r,. 1
According to this TPR's transportation plan, two-thirds of this region consists of Grand Junction/Mesa County 2%
unpopulated publicly owned land, which exaggerates the low population density" San Luis Valley 9%
The Gunnison Valley's small urban areas are Montrose, Delta, and Gunnison. Region 3 5%
The TPR plan highlights that "over 50 % of the people in the Region live in Colorado 2 7%
incorporated places and the three largest communities contain 29 % of the
Region's population."
The Intermountain TPR has an east-west orientation along the 1-70 corridor, with
the Greater Denver TPR to the east and Grand Junction/Mesa County TPR to
the west. The Intermountain small urban areas are Aspen, Carbondale,
Glenwood Springs, and Rifle.
While not actually located on the western side of the Continental Divide, the San
Luis Valley TPR has many similar characteristics to other regions of western
Colorado. This TPR is comprised of Alamosa, Chaffee, Conejos, Costilla,
Mineral, Rio Grande,and Saguache counties.
♦ ♦
Socioeconomic & Environmental Portrait 47
• The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
Demographics
The overall population of the Western Slope is projected to grow at an average
annual rate of 3.5% between 1990 and 2020, making it the fastest growing
region in Colorado. The total population will increase from almost 400,000 to
almost 810,000.
Most of the Western Slope will see higher average annual growth rates in the 0-
16 and 65 years and older age groups. Overall, the percent of the Western
Slope's population in the 65 and over age group will increase from 11% in 1990
to 13% in 2020. The percent of population less than 17 years of age will
decrease slightly from 25% in 1990 to 22% in 2020. Similarly, the percent of
population in the 17 to 64 year age group will decrease from 66% in 1990 to 85%
in 2020. Although the percentages in the 0-16 and 17-64 age groups decrease
from 1990 to 2020, there will be significantly more people in these age groups by
2020.
The percent of the West Slope households without vehicles is 5% 11990 data)
compared to the state's 7%. Only the San Luis Valley TPR matches the state's
statistic for households without vehicles, whereas all of the other TPRs in the
West Slope are lower than the state's 7%.
Regional Economy
The West Slope's labor force grew from 200,990 persons in 1990 to 266,409 in
1998, a 4% average annual increase. In 1998, 70% of employment was in
services, wholesale and retail trade, and government sectors. The Western
Slope depends on tourism as a vital aspect of its economy. In the Northwest
TPR, ranching and agriculture are a key aspect of not only its economy but
culture as well.The unemployment rate in the West Slope fell from 6% in 1990 to
5% in 1998, higher than the state's 4% unemployment rate.
Activity Centers
Western Slope Activity Centers Western Slope recreational areas are of particular interest due to their
attractiveness to residents and visitors alike, having significant implications to the
Total Visitors transportation network. A map of recreation attractors and tribal lands is on p. 43
National Parks and Monuments(1998) 2,384,795 The Westem Slope also has many scenic byways which showcase the stunning
State Parks(1998-99) 1,274,930 mountainous terrain as well as the archaeological and historic richness of the
Ski Area(1998-99) 10,978,274
area.
Total 14,637,999
Transportation Impacts
There has been a 43% increase in VMT on the Western Slope from 1990 to
1998. Given projected growth communities on the Western Slope have begun to
4 ---_
48 Socioeconomic& Environmental Portrait
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
♦
consider the impacts on the transportation infrastructure. State Highways form
the backbone of the transportation system and, as growth continues, the stress
of serving both local trips and regional trips will likely increase.
The aging population raises a number of transportation-related concerns,
including the ability of these drivers to adequately see roadway signs and
markings, both in the daytime and after dark. Other safety considerations include
reaction time,and maintaining speeds consistent with the flow of traffic.
The tourism industry is expected to increase over the next 20 years. With this in
mind, it is timely for resort areas and local communities to consider alternative
modes in their transportation planning efforts. Many ski areas and resort
communities along the Western Slope do a good job in providing their visitors
with transit options. The ski resorts offer a variety of transportation services such
as shuttle buses and hotel vanpooling in an attempt to minimize private motor
vehicle use. However, transit opportunities outside of the resort communities are
limited or non-existent.
In the tourism-oriented areas of the Western Slope, service workers often are
required to travel long distances if affordable housing is not available near their
jobs.
The scenic byways attract many summer and fall travelers. Although only the
Alpine Loop and a portion of the West Elk Loop Byways are closed in the winter,
travelers are always encouraged to check weather conditions and forecasts
because portions of the byways may not be paved and long stretches exist
without access to services.
Air service is vital to maintaining and enhancing viability of local and regional
economies in the Western Slope. Airports provide a critical link in the
transportation system of the Western Slope. Commercial air service reliability
and availability varies throughout the region. As a result, rural and small urban
areas suffer from poor quality service and higher ticket prices.
Rail line abandonment is also a concern for the Western Slope as well as it could
also mean additional truck VMT on Western Slope roads and highways.
Improving surface condition and adding or enhancing highway shoulders is
costly,especially in mountainous terrain.
Summary
In summary, the Western Slope's transportation system is affected by the growth
in population, the low density of the area, the components of its economy,
particularly tourism, and geography. The diversity of lifestyles, including the more
urban-oriented newcomers to the area versus the more rural-oriented long-time
residents also contributes to complex travel demands. Consequently,
transportation needs range from basic preservation and reconstruction of roads
• ♦
Socioeconomic& Environmental Portrait 49
♦ The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future♦
to safety considerations, spot congestion problems, transit service for
specialized, tourism and general population needs, aviation service and
telecommunications.
• -- 1
50 Socioeconomic& Environmental Portrait
Recreation Attractors and Tribal Lands
RECREATION ATTRACTORS
and TRIBAL LANDS
SEDGWICK
Ski Areas
•' a. 0 - 100000
LOGAN
• •
MOFFAT ,
r ' JACKSON L i. • PHILLIPS • 100001 — 500000
r ROU
TT RTT s ? r'. . �� I
._ • - - •f,. • 500001 - 100000
• 100001 - 150000
f . '"I' RG"N Major Reservoirs
souwe t •
GRAND • •; ' _ YU►A National Parks
I RIO BLANCO 4 • � •
'• :r•„ P WASHINGTON Tribal Lands
•A. • LPIf
J .
e, • ,'EAGLE" Cl• . JEF .VER r1. { BLM
j_......_
a
GARFIELQ..-. • • ;I.. • CRBEs • ARARAH OE National Forests
I ... hESA / PRKIN - . ., • DOUGLAS ELBERT LINCOLN i K CARSON N
• •. • LAKE PARK I J . ik
• DELTA B.PASO • CHEYENNE
�.�.. CHAFFEE •
• OUNNMON • TELL -
MONTROSE • KIOWA .
• FREMONT' CROWLEY
"
URAY PUEBLO P I .
CUSTER
SAN MIGUEL HINSDALE
1 , SACjUACHE OTERO PROWERS
• BENT
DOLORES II.
9AN 7• al
JUAN : �NEsiAL 1' HUERFAN4f
•
T . • RIO GFIANOE . .ALAMQSA
iNi>H�ZU 1-APLA.TA ,� JJ II
• f � / ' r^-'J I AS ANIMAS ) &;CA
ARCNULETA' • COSTILLA'{••+' i
41-''....1 •t's '} \ CUNEJOb II I
u i ��J I
Date Produced April 52000
♦ The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
Environmental Overview
Addressing environmental issues is critical to the development of a successful
transportation system that contributes to the quality of life valued by Colorado
citizens.As a result,the Transportation Commission(TC) has adopted a policy to
guide the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) as it develops,
maintains, and operates the state transportation system.
TRANSPORTATIONCOMMISSIONENV IRONMENTALPOLICY
STATEMENT
Department s Value Statement "CDOT will promote a transportation system that is
environmentally responsible and encourages preservation of the
natural and enhancement of the created environment for current
"In everything we do, we will be guided by and future generations. We will incorporate social, economic,
certain values.We will: . . . make decisions and environmental concerns into the planning, design,
construction, maintenance and operations of the state's existing
which are compatible with Colorado's
and future transportation system. With the active participation of
quality of life, environmental, and economic the general public, federal, state and local agencies, we will
goals." objectively consider all reasonable alternatives to avoid or
minimize adverse impacts."
CDOT uses an integrated and interdisciplinary approach when planning projects
Department's Goal II, Strategy A in order to comply with local, state, and federal laws and policies pertaining tc the
environment. On a project specific basis. hazardous waste sites, historic value,
"COOT will work to implement procedures archaeology, palenontoloy, and noise issues will continue to be addressed Air
and methods that will result in a safer, more quality, wetlands,ecology and wildlife are discussed below.
environmentally sensitive, more cast-
effective integrated transportation system." AIR QUALITY
There is a close link between Colorado's transportation system and its air quality.
Emissions from transportation-related pollutants are a significant contributor to
many of the air pollution problems experienced in Colorado and around the
country. As a result, significant federal regulations that guide transportation
decision-making in areas that have violated federal air quality standards have
been developed. In addition, the Transportation Commission has directed special
attention to those areas in the state that are "at-risk"for poor air quality.
Poor urban visibility, or the "brown cloud" problem, is present in some rural areas
in Colorado as well as along the Front Range urban areas. In many areas
emissions from vehicle exhausts and re-entrained (kicked up) dust from travel on
roads contribute significantly to the "brown cloud" problem. Many of the fastest
growing parts of the state are in rural resort communities situated in mountain
valleys where significant increases in winter season traffic combined with the
right meteorological conditions conducive to causing high levals of air pollution
52 Socioeconomic& Environmental Portrait
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
♦
have created local concerns. Although no violations currently exist, early
identification of these areas enables decision-makers to be sensitive when
making air quality decisions and implementing proper mitigation measures.
Federal transportation and air quality legislation requires that all projects adopted
or approved by a recipient of federal transportation funds be consistent or
"conform° with federally required air quality plans for areas violating federal air
quality standards (non-attainment). Areas that have been identified as existing
non-attainment areas for PM10 (violating the federal standard for particulate
matter of 10 microns or less), ozone carbon monoxide (CO)and at-risk areas are
mapped on page 54.
Metropolitan Areas
Metropolitan non-attainment area motor vehicle emissions associated with long-
range plans,transportation improvement programs(TIPs)and individual projects,
may not exceed the emissions budget identified in the State Implementation Plan
(SIP)for Air Quality. The emissions budget is the maximum amount of pollutant
emissions allowed per day as identified in the State Implementation Plan (SIP). If
the emissions budget is exceeded, Plans, TIPs, and regionally significant
projects, which must be approved by a recipient of federal funds, may not
proceed. Occasional exceptions may be made for safety and maintenance types
of projects that do not increase the capacity of the highway.
Rural Areas
Projects proposed in rural non-attainment areas adopted or approved by a
recipient of federal transportation funds have more flexibility in evaluating
conformity with the SIP. Projects can either satisfy the emissions budget criteria
or complete a"build/no build"test of emissions reductions.
At-Risk Areas
Areas around the state that have characteristics that may lead to elevated levels
of air pollutants have been identified. These areas are called at-risk areas. It is in
the interests of CDOT, local governments and citizens to take reasonable steps
to ensure that acceptable air quality is maintained in these sensitive areas so
that public health and a good quality of life are guaranteed. Transportation
projects and maintenance operations in these areas should be evaluated with
special care to ensure that they include all practical measures to reduce
emissions from transportation-related pollutants.
4% ♦
Socioeconomic& Environmental Portrait 53
Non-Attainment Areas
Non-Attainment Areas 0 Non-Attainment Areas - PM10
MEI Non Attainment Areas- CO
® At-Risk Areas
I /Np'
STEAMBOAT FORT COLLINS /�
SPRIN `/
GREELEY
w f I
I III
„;. LONGMONT
I FRASER 3 J
WINKE
PARKS AUK J�
CEN ••LC •A/bet<
_i___
�'-'-'�"'� I-70 CORRIDOR'
QENWOOD SPRINGS
rf' I
ASPEN t I
GRAND JUNCTION I
�'�K FOREST'-
h,DATA CRESTED BUTTE CRIPPLE CREEK ka7.•DO
r .,.•,; xjp
GS
_. _..... M � CANON CITY -
ONTROg
L
L "-`-ter q LAMAR
TELLURIDE
o,.
(I// I IfT / JI
7 / J I ALAMOS4 J I 4 i 1
I i ( - -I l y?•ter�! II
1j DURANGO I PPAGOS iI
Date Produced: November 29. 1999
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
♦
WETLANDS
Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas, but also
may include areas that are regulady, but not continually, submerged. They are
important for a variety of reasons including: water quality improvement; fish arid
wildlife habitat; aquatic food chain support; flood attenuation and stormwater
detention; shoreline anchoring; groundwater recharge and discharge;
recreation, education, and nature study uses. Where wetland impacts cannot be [DOT is heavily involved in wehands
avoided because of impractical circumstances during the construction phase of preservation
transportation projects, minimization of impacts and compensatory wetland
mitigation is required. However, the first priority is to mitigate the impact at the
site of the impacted wetlands. The future of wetlands appears to depend upon
stricter wetland regulations and stream restoration.
Wetland Banking
Wetland Banking is one alternative method used to mitigate the potential loss of
wetlands if on-site mitigation is not possible. The purpose of a wetland bank is to
create wetland acreage in advance that can be used to offset wetland impacts for
proposed transportation projects that would impact an existing wetland. CDOT is
in the process of developing a statewide wetland banking program agreement
with the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (CE) that would be beneficial to early
project planning.
ECOLOGY& WILDLIFE
Ecosystems are significantly and regularly affected by the transportation system
and associated development. As the transportation system is developed,
maintained and operated, the impacts must be continually evaluated and
mitigation opportunities must be identified and implemented. Growing rates of
urban and industrial development, a highly mobile public, and changing
agricultural practices are rapidly altering the environment for many threatened
and endangered species. An increasing number of species are unable to cope
with changing habitats and are in danger of extinction.
Threatened and Endangered Species
In Colorado there are 33 species of fish, birds, mammals, and plants appearing
on the federal list of threatened or endangered species. Another 11 are identified
as candidate species(US Fish and Wildlife Service Webpage, 10/19/00). In order
to comply with the federal Endangered Species Act, CDOT evaluates all possible
adverse impacts and takes all necessary measures to avoid harming threatened
and endangered animal and plant species before construction and maintenance
activities begin.
♦ ♦
Socioeconomic& Environmental Portrait 55
• The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
There are two ecosystems that support a large percentage of those sensitive
Colorado species that are most affected by development. One ecosystem is the
short-grass prairie of eastern Colorado that houses the prairie dog, swift fox,
mountain plover, black-footed ferret, ferruginous hawk, and other birds. The
other ecosystem is the riparian (streamside) system that includes bald eagles,
Preble's meadow jumping mouse, southwestern willow flycatcher, several
species of fish, Ute ladies' tresses orchid, and Colorado butterfly plant CDOT
works with land management agencies to identify strategies that can address the
requirements of these sensitive species while providing an effective
transportation system for Colorado.
Rather than protecting a single species and its' habitat, the future emphasis for
threatened and endangered species will be on protecting ecosystems that
support a number of rare species, such as short-grass prairie and riparian
systems. Furthermore, it is likely that efforts will be made to restore ecosystems
and wildlife corridors, protecting them from additional fragmentation.
• ----1
56 Socioeconomic& Environmental Portrait
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.
PASSENGER MOBILITY
In March 2000 CDOT conducted 1200 telephone surveys throughout the State of
Colorado to assess resident's opinions about their travel needs. When asked
which should receive the highest priority-- transportation safety, maintenance
and repair of the transportation system, or providing travel options and relief from
congestion-- over half chose travel options and congestion relief. Maintenance
and repair was chosen as the main concern by almost half of those in the
Eastern Plains and Western Slope and congestion relief was viewed as most
important by almost two-thirds of those in Metro Denver and almost half of those
in the rest of the Front Range
When the respondents to the telephone survey were asked which method of
reducing congestion they favored, just over half (51%) favored adding lanes to
highways and 44% preferred adding facilities to serve alternate modes such as
transit, bicycles or pedestrians, Transportation Demand Management, or rail.
When asked how likely they would use various transportation alternatives if
available, 44% of survey respondents said they would telecommute, another
44% said they would ride light rail,42%would carpool, 33%would ride a bus and
30% would ride a bicycle. This survey reflects the public's awareness that road
building alone will not solve the congestion problems in all cases, especially in
the urban areas. The following discussion describes the current status of modal
transportation in Colorado.
Rail Element has been revised frotr the 7-
R c H l Element 5-2000 draft to expand discussion on
passenger rail. Also. map on page 9 has
been revised from 7-5-2000 draft to relbzct
Rail transportation played a significant role in Colorado's history. Over the last 40 public comments.
years, land use patterns encouraged a high level of auto dependence, ---- --- — --
contributing to the decline in passenger rail service. However, there is a renewed
interest in rail transportation in several of Colorado's Front Range and mountain Rail
corridor communities. Rail transportation can provide a viable alternative to the Project Summary_
automobile traveling between the state's major urban centers. Fiscally Constrained $.003B
Existing passenger rail service in Colorado is limited to cross-country trips rather Unfunded Projects $10.76
than intra-state travel. Passenger rail service is provided almost exclusively by
AMTRAK with the exception of a few small railroads serving tourists.
In order to supplement the limited passenger rail planning information available
for regional and statewide transportation planning purposes, CDOT engaged the
services of a consultant and the Colorado Passenger Rail Study was completed
in January 1997. This study assembled a variety of data and information to
determine passenger rail feasibility in a number of selected corridors. Although
not adopted by the Transportation Commission, the study served as a technical
•
Passenger Mobility 57
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado"s Future♦
resource for the Regional Planning Commissions around the state as they
updated their regional transportation plans in 1998 and 1999.
Several of the Regional Planning Commissions included passenger rail corridor
projects in their preferred (unfunded) plans, totaling approximately $10.7 billion
These proposed passenger rail corridors do not include light rail, which is
classified with mass transit projects.
In response to the interest in passenger rail, and its own concerns over -he
impacts of rail abandonment in Colorado, the Transportation Commission
recognized the state as having a role in rail transportation in the following
circumstances:
• Preserving rail corridors for future use may save money since I:he cost to
preserve a corridor for future transportation purposes is often far less
than having to purchase an equivalent corridor in the future.
• Rail transportation can be a cost effective and environmentally
preferable mode of transportation in certain situations.
• Freight rail can reduce the maintenance costs on state highways since
transport of displaced rail freight will increase deterioration of the state
highway system used to transport that freight.
• Freight rail service can serve as a lifeline to the economic health of the
community when there are no other economic modes available to serve
the needs of the community.
Based on these interests, the Colorado Transportation Commission recently
approved a Rail Corridor Preservation Policy that identifies the types of rail
activities in which CDOT can engage and the criteria for identifying State
Significant Rail Corridors where these activities can occur. The Rail Corridor
Preservation Policy recognizes that preservation can include not only purchasing
existing rail lines and rights-of-way but also purchasing rights-of-way for new rail
lines. These actions are necessary when an existing railroad is subject to
abandonment or when there is not sufficient right-of-way within an existing
highway corridor identified for rail improvements. In addition, preservation can
consist of reserving a rail"envelope"within existing rail or highway rights-of-way.
These types of preservation apply to active rail lines that are not in danger of
being abandoned or to existing highway corridors designated for rail service in
the future. Preservation would ensure that interim improvements made in the
corridor by the railroad or CDOT would not preclude the implementation of
passenger rail improvements in the future. See the map on page 59 showing the
locations of the proposed statewide significant rail corridors.
•
58 Passenger Mobility
.. _ _ _ _. ___._ _. __ - - - - _ __ __ __� -r -. - _.._. _ . _. _ _. _. _ _. - - _._ F - _. -" - - - RAIL CORRIDORS OF STATE
_� z I SIGNIFICANCE FOR
I . ;r PRESERVATION
r
II I `` ml"� THESE CIXiRoHAS ME SE ESE TO
ASANWN""SUE "MAY"SARY F OPT CO.tNS i CORRIDORS NO ORDER TO PRESERVE lHEu
u➢ 1 v RMNCH ..I� GW I I r ORPOTENTIAI FUTURE RAIt SERTICE
• .. _ _ _ J
1 i 175 I _-_._._._._ _ _-_ . THESE CORROORS ARE SUBJECT TO
. 1 / I F, -T-1 MPRO'EMENTSMITHN EXISTING RAIL OR
,9/ O ON N GNNAY CORK COBS t MAY BE
.3 _4S Dirt 1r' PAUNCH r NECESSARY TO PLAN PROPOSED
- pCnE / i F. .I 1 IMPROVEMENTS OR PURCHASE SMALL
- / AMOUNTS OFRGHT-OF-WAYN ORDER TO
PRESEflVE THE E%sT NG GORR WRE Eov
/ yn- - POLENTA.EUT IuSE RA SERVICE
I ___. i I - m .NECE XIIRR'CHRS DO NOT
I PHYSICALLY[- ST THE ERCNI RANGE
_ - /OGTVC. V._1."TOLL ROAD AUTHORITY HAS DESGNAVEIA
• I 1 (/BOULDER 1, _ _ -._._.i. .-I 12 MILE WIDE CORRIDOR AND NO SPECIFIC
_..__ _ T-. Y"__ HIGHWAVMIIB ALIGNMENT HASNOT SEEN
_ DESIGNATED.ORCOG HAS NOT*ENT-FIST
S OLDEN. LINE �r EI.SPE Ec OCR OR CON EC NG
BCG ro O D
• �• r ,1.(E.. .. .. .. _
I.`�Y E F^ L D.T.ti w<N, s Q. i
..�, r• 1
" -_-DOR
_ ._ "_"T -__ _._ _1ic- ` ^ `O RIO Tun'I -
1 ` 1 Y
: ._. � r.,l I Yr, y • FREIG�XIPo
r BYPASS
- J . . -. - i I
.. .. - I
---Y 1 TENNESSEE SS _ - j'_
... Y. JOINT-LIRE L�' I IL -M • - UP
NPl✓• , - I _ v
I I
I
1 _ _ CBI
,-
O
BM/
I
Lfr1
li
L (l
L.
/I ))r 1.
/\ .
Tw
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investin• g in Colorodo's future
Transit Element
Some segments of Colorado's population do not have access to an automobile
due to their age,financial constraints, physical condition, or as a personal choice
Transit services provide an effective alternative to congestion for those who wish
to have an alternative to their automobile to get to work, shopping or school. The
Colorado Department of Transportation recognizes the valuable role transit plays
in enabling the elderly and disabled to stay active and independent. providing
access for rural Colorado residents, providing an alternative to congestion.
reducing air pollution, and getting the labor force to work.
Transit in Colorado can be categorized into the following five types of service
with the number of providers in parentheses. The map on page 63 illustrates the
location of transit services in Colorado:
• Specialized services for the disabled and elderly(50)
• Rural services for the general public(10)
• Resort services for the general public(14)
• Urban services for the general public (11)
• Intercity services for the general public(5)
Generally, the urban, resort and intercity operators provide fixed route services
and the rural and specialized operators provide demand responsive services with
varying routes. Transit providers currently employ 7,700 people in the state with
a payroll of$212 million.
In order to assist the Regional Planning Commissions in estimating their future
transit needs, the 1999 Transit Needs and Benefits Study (TNBS) was prepared
under CDOT contract. The TNBS included a household telephone survey and a
survey of existing transit providers. Among the findings from the TNBS
household survey, some manner of transd service is available to 70 % of the
urban residents and 39 % of the rural residents. According to the TNBS'; Provider
survey, transit agencies in Colorado spent over $287 million in 1996 on moving
people by transit. These expenditures included both vehicle purchases and the
operation of transit vehicles. These transit agencies provided approximately 69
million trips annually (79% of those trips are in the urban areas), compared to the
estimated existing need of 156 million trips. Approximately 44 % of the current
transit demand is now being met.
The Transit Needs and Benefits Study provided the Transportation Planning
Regions with three operating scenarios. These scenarios were based upon three
different levels of transit service. Scenario A was based upon providing the sane
number of trips as providec today; regardless of population growth. Scenario B
60 Passenger Mobility
The 2020 Stotewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.
represented the transit needs if the current level of service kept up with
population growth. Scenario C was an estimate of the transit needs if 50% of the
needs were met. Only the Denver Region and the Intermountain Region
(containing a number of ski resorts) currently accommodate 50% or more of their
transit demand. It must be noted that transit needs identified in the 2020 Plans
for the Denver, Colorado Springs, and North Front Range metropolitan areas
were incorporated into the 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan. The Metropolitan
Planning Organizations (MPOs) have more sophisticated analytical tools for
projecting transit needs than are available to the rural transportation planning
regions, which utilized the TNBS information.
Most Regional Planning Commissions adopted Scenario C for their Preferred
Plans and Scenario B for their Constrained Plans. The exceptions were the
Denver and the North Front Range Regions, which adopted Scenario C for their
Constrained Plans. The estimated cost to implement the transit elements (bus
and LRT) of the Constrained Plans is $11.8 billion. This funding is needed not
only to purchase buses, but also to operate them, construct park-n-ride lots and Transit
bus stations. The Transportation Planning Regions identified $5.8 billion of Project Summary
unfunded transit demand in the state. Included are bus and rapid transit facilities,
Fiscally Constrained $11.88
as well as passenger-moving gondola projects in Crested Butte, Steamboat
Springs, Winter Park and Telluride. Unfunded Projects $5.8B
Transit providers call upon a variety of funding sources to pay their operating
expenses. Urban transit providers receive 75% of their operating revenues from
local governments or dedicated taxes; 20% from the fare box and 5% from the
federal government. Resort providers also receive 75% of their operating
expenses from local governments but only 13% from the fare box and 2% from
the federal government. The remainder of their funding (10%) comes from the
resorts; many of who do not charge fares to better accommodate the needs of
their visitors. Finally, the rural and specialized providers derive a higher
percentage of their operating revenue (45%)from the federal government and a
lesser amount (25%) from the local governments, 20% from contracts with
human service agencies and 10% from the farebox. The State of Colorado
provides no state funds for transit but does administer approximately$3 million in
federal funds that are distributed to transit operators that serve rural areas, the
elderly and disabled populations.
• •
Passenger Mobility 61
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan• : Investing in Colorado's Futures
Transit Funding Sources
Transit Funding Sources
100% 2.t1 y y ANN �i : }" ■Federal -.
F r = 0 Human
Servos
80%
"' -...77F, o Private
c 60% " +5:4p z ...ill
w ,a„ „y ■Fares
L 40% h ~ £ Tii _ �
ru Oki a-�Y.a ,;�; '"" �..Local Gott or
Dedicated Ta*
20%
� vF:
Urban Resort Rural &
Specialized
----♦
62 Passenger Mobility
I- . "—V-i'7 2 V'3'• Tr-_6--�e�V-T.-6 .:,6_V i0. 1ivi —t3v i4T' j6! 177—t67 1B1-20V 21•� 23V 24• zfi.$, 27 28V . ._-; Colorado
I P . ./.I,.a,. I ' y ""� , — Ma , IBM' Passenger Services Map orirl Si I \ WOO loot r ±.r.. '1 LEGEND
._
OVA
• t't'''. -,.
1 v'.J�.•..s --.1s.4-1--
��•t•" •. \\ .... J ie• .t w•- -,� II HIMarwih a C ounMNu&o TVA
:C \ „ s .„ l.. - 4 . .... __ .1 pMrl.ocN task
ua1.N t / l . W .. . . J - •I0 ►ruw.aui t nw
L\ .. . . • ... _/ an,.. i- '_" �.♦ I ` 1 we�IR -----Conn bawd.,ry
IQlrlas,..w.
►I 1 i alsaao, .v+'..N >�+ — _ — '�• i .. I`` ' }'" ` ._•� LOA Old amovoin
IC , - r -. ..rY P • —. __Y �,1 � .. Oa�YN ' ,\ qaM r . Natlool lAen..rnb sod•IAN
AMMO
_ ii. .
•^5' ►/.ate al IN T Ii _ It ' '0. Indian ItoproNIN
u.b•nia.d Ma
I • bra. id - _y w` _• -, —i-'y---'- J •'-�.-... canonr.w orvld.•�r(( r a1
a.o .a. '•' .1.`. : — AMIN rr ' 7II PuWcTrr.•pa,bm
id .T/fry �...[ �?� J\ :�' �•., ,Nm,. MOST. I� 1 sartl+Tia.d`,n.pa,dar.
Q Q wns. i' . I ��,.;: .�. - .. a.....� 1 ...: ..nval�sawn.
I AVM r ..i 7f : ,,.,. I �": ....lr •• •
i 71 tmwwe,aisavin AAA.,
•
�� 1..% i 7Y -t` . 1lrww \ w— •r l� i1 'N lmtlen
I, • IM 'rr.o:011b •--•r R•nRi.r �• •. ( ®-� Sonw}Mao.<imam.i•a.ro•1 � y u rne.` OU ,." • . • I J us w/w+va
I J �' '-'� G TANA N� C s•..Highways
J
• I G •
i 4
•� x- M J• Compiled from information available as oflanuary,2000
P. .n.._:°�-r� • .e.Raa \ i• • •• • ~r•t 4 •�' r �°:^1 r x I • ^I Metro Denier Intel
ar —Fli 1 • ''' .‘-. — ...i•A4 .7'I.: •1 t M.raaw.A. x . w is;;A;• w..o. 1 I a • ROM '♦ jil: _ ~ JI ( _
!i,•a, .l, w•sa• •`,'x •.',C• 91 1j �•. \ . .. :"J.cF - ��
14 •: I i'�\ �� 4:414L .i."." . .- „o, - ki .,n • IQ ' li A s
AMA r 1A E rouia •.'':• A. f I).-\\Y �_� ic� ds•` !•jdw(/) '� • _ nar.. KIN :5 f ".rr .I.
' �./•u•w,a.l'` I ,S �"dsi — ,scrwal ti - , � �• `: ?� i ,.o. ..:All/ i �. ut�~ :: -• fr
__ll .- . 7 �J wwws f �• �_"^"• .'�i. -' ///1 tr { ii
'''V-N.
, x.1— `� ` wm.� :rri--( "-' O,tR1A \`��} - -��T _/� �.�- +-++' • ,O i�'a.m t �/ • ..ii.:•t•', [r:e
P ~'.1 as _ 'JS• "....'-,.....,..,--17A, .k COAX Y.. "•J �I �1. t • S � a r I` J
a— •/ )x is T • .).r.ua yam_.._...-:1 •
Y • _ - > •.✓,� %v. A'r P. • ' 'a ti •l j' R",,I- .
►__ \---,..1 p(1+ . 1 psi +I � f _ _ `t _.. • L3. >t } _ ..
�: ........"L'"),' .• '--•_•__.. --1.7.7......:•�J..y.♦_.._...,.. ...._..\,'-`fin•--... ^L.`"-.,1• --.4.--.----11.7"' fir,•.•-1 n•...,. f4 _f•�.. •. � .>;�'..uY•,i ...�.
m.o. �,''�, s. ' .� $ T//' t,uall 'S I I !.-1,--.4.-21. ♦ I t I ', ..r , r-�w} -'') .
if.1 •=-..r \•L_ i '� _ • .yam..
1...- � 4 5 6 ♦ ♦.d..♦.6 ♦ 16♦ I I 12 13 �f1 95- i6 1Tj I �1$- •-4....L., ..•.. `i- •..
ht4r.w PIES o14.ry 4................It 14:1_..[.1
ASIS1ENCIA DENTRO ESPAAOL SPECULLJZED TRANSIT OPERATORS 4.,..-.... �`� p1 '4•• COMMERCIAL TRANSPORTATION
▪•.•"4"•.,.:2.t 140..'5. .,.....I.4.-. • • OPERATORS
.n_..w•.t...wo_.� _.1.14 0000,.. ,_".......«... .�.4, � 'OT CACTA
e 1 .....�.':e.. .0.:::: _00 0_Iron Pr,,..4,04.0''`.,.04.14.4. ..u,« .................
0-.� ����
w....w....•' r.. �w..t�. SP,% .,>14,14. �.w.. .'d"�d rel0,040•00. 0000.. L., •' ,..
+.,.• °•fM5ta.w.m••""' •••rn-•:. ... �•,.. 0000..,........ .•r,••••••••a w..••••.•wrww•..
n•.w..uw. *4(1 _ r„.4.ac ...............>»....r..M.e 17.«..i4'... .». s ...o... w..l...........66 `
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION • ft.....................► .ro»�, n �...ft
..pNw. "' ^�w��s 1414 SERVICES AND RECREATION
...101....r.....O... a •14ri.r 6.w..`,`...:w .ww:,mm...
- ---- 4.m..1.0 .'..r...w.••... . •.>el L5.,,u r-00.00..•14»wvrw..
400. V.r .t4.,,...w-.C.3. . V••••••,.....„,.....9.1......,f ., Wb .. ........................140 ewrY..�.one .n+..wrMrw Orr.1414...».
l.saY.�.Y4.r.rw.•..s r..r 140MD . 5.,.r I. 3.i.r.rs.v 4141 we...yw. ..3.v+..W Im V`II.n.0.....w.
•. p.pa pm o..0.br.`..0.........`•0• 0000.�tww ft/f ,.uu,. ...e f 141.4- . a...............a....a/ ^✓•�•aw»a.wa.n..awr.a.,s w`•`..... `«0WOrai r . .e .a0.,o...m
m.sstivlm.ww4.......»00.0.4 .V.row.1..a...wwi....�"`......�r•wru...,.�..
.0.w.••.ter.mr:M,.4.`5.:•x'•.»•0.:.0: l.,- ..w•..v,:...0 a 0.141. 6..Caw,or.•••..••. .._..,... •v. .3.m........,...... ........,...0,40.. 00,0„.„
VIVA h...•••fall 4.4M. r•MOO. •,r•y 4.—Cp.*.-Mr..45 .,♦.H.5. �`r5�.=.�•1••xw.-•ir.. a—'u—w w 4..,.14
Ow.sw....rr.•••••..I••s•a r.mrr 3.••.••014 •°aa.t m». ,."5 O..,r...r w ewe....... .N...rwl.......4a.....M�.
.M.�,.sn•10...nreMne.•••n Nom 14,14 m0••!« ,pp••r,...•.'wrwu14nru,awn.Waa..,.nn..m1400 u.•y
• 1....'r.w.•..wa..vrm w.•.w. Crap ......, •••.wl.�mm.msbmwwr..m rpr^.p. ..FT anY.wu wr,�wro•.m..*mom.r.....�.r
Ilrs..w..�.r...�..... PM.W..--1d441ra!• .414.4.. , 00..11.of .,y,.,,,„ sr•n.rwa,.wtw.. .5.f 5-..,...w..-..5-0.4.5».....w5�•.."•• YallYs.e•r.r.m,•a.. esOo.v..a.ae....
__In •00•00wnwn•.e.,..0w n 0••••4*en 4. ...r..•s•.aol 1M► n5. .. r•�.0...0......... s"0r••� n..»m.,
M•.,•.....OG,..m..inrl rl...s.a.
.M.4..x••••0..T~•_w•••••••.er�. •rOw..r....r... r.-5.. H ..~.r•�R ',yo-yo S..'n.. c>M U!. w..,.vr•.r.�.r.1400.r'5- 000...4..r•.i ..414.1
ff.0.0`�' �• ..e.Is It " ,.r..•5-•-....w. r• . ..•..e• sat
143.•,-14 ••.•4w14.0.n
'......awn M•..••••••••••••••„60 m•
r.•.•.I.uG..<ww . Mw..,.`►..M G(• 141,1,.,.••"I r pr•••`r..5—`M•,.m COO. ....tMu UMW ..............................................................b •` ••I
▪ .-uwr••.•r...'....e..s ..r...•w.b runs a. C '1.0...14 T r.0144..r.M..]...t.�r...v 5.w _ . qy.e.aw.r�n...w``,•,rnM 0.n....•.,•n.w•.•r
c...,.w...4.•.0....rr^1411 •1 5—r.......u..••...eee•6(ai•n1,.. 4."‘"55'"."'"'".".mew •,.,t 1445 , a.r..d ..d. ..............".••n wni....4,4.'.14 • •• •
w.mrw•sn 40.006.••••• M 1141.411440•.1..5- x.Tf a. ._cwbtr,•r•p<Ga1 ♦ n,...u0..
�ur4Yv.w.�..M•.G.m.m Imp
w^ N 0.145• .5-1 4000100v1,101.66.0.�..Ml�. MO 1..4,.41 •Ytlwl•,..3.-.s
4►Mp mt•w*1400.4551■06( .5—w a...em0..w.w 0.3..14.. .evn. .,144.0' ... .....rrn...a. •.x a, 14'14"'^' ua°.•..n.3.4....vImmae4
..�...rw r ,•6.4. .v..a. y.M.,..5-.•„re... :11...
r0..14.4. ... (Ib,r X1.14. ar... .w00006.-1�6f w.,. .-...1+n .......e.4.5-3.014+ f ••r:r•rtr..,w.:. t.-q 14'''•1414 ' . t..,.•4..14 of +15.•14 ...- 11114 C4 m m 1x0 •'6..0•••0•
-•- 0000.. c.5—o.+r.A■ .,w+..�+.0000.. 55.+...43.,w. .44 ..4....44146. .,.5.,..m .0.. Gam.. ,�... .,.n •nom.,.•..., wins'a.,,,,r..--' ... ."' w•.'a�.':.°T'0>.. .a.>_�._... ..�......, ...,..w..6.
...5-..=,.y,.. MI V....,.n...-' ►• 4_143..
•CO... Ttwo ., .hiv..I P. w.10.0.lre ..,....se.w.....,5....m.......+......
- <.....1.14! .......„.....w,c.l `�""'r � . :..i.'.. �...-..��..pmN..H.�..rkm...,",.,.r•r..5-l..... I ..w,,. ..s+�.....�as� ..+,..,..� .w., ...v.�w�s.'an.,:..... mau.«. 5- ".e. •x.'e"•r".... '«u5. eru.o.�f"�,.•.• 7..o.m. ..� w°"....'..w'.I`0*, ...,o.,.5-..C.•p.p..•.j.. ........ ..15.5. ..,a. 114.4■ 5� ..w 1400 ....•......»,,.,. .r........, e.�ma�at o.+1414.•.a....r..�.r..m.......n.e.w.'.r.o
Gp ••.w..._.4,-•r.5..144... n 44.161 V r, r.r.I........-•r•.K6• .....r l.....5-,.r-., 140• :14•'.1:0-. , •500.4.0.0........004•m«��..•w••.• mew.•
p. 01••14550•••"x'-0401 c.o.. a... T..mFr...�w '+wa ..^ ........e.r...5�.mr,..
0.4$4...6 14..11 woe.C.. •�•� '....=".4'..="2.4...1=.....?,?...... >.v,r.. _ >m 04101. '..4....14'•0...............11........•r5-
..r 55.•.ri■ .4r-.V u.4w •s..el,ryr.'.M..M.•r.m+".:000000,5 4,600 114.�..«.
pppm..a.�"°r°...... •a wr..-'mesa• n,.1..• .t.... .`..w.'(;�.w.. ... m...........4..r....,....r,«....w.c.1.0,w,w5-•.,
n 0•04.0.•••••••1550.6 •n,4.,,r w a.....yw.,.. t u.r.�Kf�.l bfwM" .a, u...r f ..1414... 5-u 4........................1.••..•m
4I..•.0y ..w.1w•...+ 1!141414.. ..e.w:r 114.. m Ions•..5-.a......,al.a.n...'.5-.»w'.'........ .r.
0.4,401
• w 501(.6 .. 3.a• . r Mr�.Y45-w-45-•y.'.p^Ol 14.5.0, m 45- I ^ 4004.4...
_▪ .•......c.5-.,0 6' 141.14,5. ."'r'•i'.s..ls: �..... :. 5.e '""..�.,`"",.�...`.'� [55..5,5. ............M...40., 01 000...., �.�'^�:..+.'. `R..O x.5-4:
..r3..41.1114 . •i 5.00*tame! .0., y°"rw.•..r t?6f 0.143..1, • .1414+.4 s... 1..'►... ,_.• rM. 014 ,�+......r...r.+�.n..w.w•..•.r 5-w 5..w
....w.. 0..0,14. 'm 1400 r n5.„ ......4
•,r... `1 .4......;:r.
wi.•...•5-.arw ea.,m..s.rw•..wwrwr...s.
110.r,.r .,e.�...�. .w 1'�.,Y.o.1 • M.I4w 1. ...•..,10.6...wr.-..•r5-.
In... .14.0006. ...•., •6.(f a.®r.. 5.,c,...,.....„,..,,..,
1143....+. ,,,1414 Oa v................ 31 .nM.MO - r.w,r.um• 45141144 ,4..NI r..M..sw 0.00• I,14.*.m.Ir'
ura...rx w. •� sl� �f`l�v rte' wry tr..vrM..rr 4144 14.14.•••11.11,.4.,.• 5..M .M.'.,F.. of.........M.Mr
•w.ar..twa 0556
v.n v.•e •'^'0°"` s. .w..w.er ry0 >uaf 4001. ..m. .5-w tlllf�lOY....M.,w n.n.ono.15-.w...w.am...
Meg!goy fr .5,5,._ai .r.r05-w1.w ....r ....0014 r 000...1 1.4......•row 4w...•ma.O_Yrw_•m_
50...1. Gm . .F♦1..1.
...••°0`•.-04�5-.oc°`0..41 04 _ . FOR MORE INFORMATION rasa fr... ' .........................a.......••••,.
w�T��o
iNTERC TTY BUS OPERATORS 1410 N054,.0` "•ap'�"•• •.5-.. rw..0..'..w.4n......o,
..ww«awr ••03.14.1 s.w.00.0.4_a.40.. .C. 0,00,m, •.... WO tor am y,'5.'"',. 1400"^' n....1
n t 0,•14,..•.1.4• 0,011 ww....wv...w>o...,..w ...,< ..,..r„
0.0.00. .w 0014 •14•a.�y 4 a.•0•b..41........�l ..>r•n'. nM.,».....a..on.. 414..0 vb,w >.. o.n.o....a.1.. ..MYOW ...-.r Om.apse 0455-.11114•.w.hq.0».w•..p,.'•r........I
L.5441.4 .WO. ri•a..•i...narJ+•aa:.5sw� y......ww..«.... .......4
r••••••
1!.•• w'.. 0040, .077"..4
_ s�.f '"....•.r'..a•.ay.«s.0.+n..w4.0.47:'''''
» .rum.....
..0`144'. �..,.... 1455,...1n r rr .a 1400...cw.wrr 14.14.ola,..... •.atmt ¢C00,06 14.....0-061..46606 o..n•nr4e...w ....n M......w.. „.5-m. +..wwwvmw...a«•••'+..•`awl.a 05.0.wr..0.n.r.•w0 an..bw."o`...
+.6410..».On...a..OMVO 0VIM 0.•.c4".- ...01...0 14.........5-.3.......1. ao.•n�.m<4......
°.'•Ir an r..•5-��.......r..
•rep 4.....3.54.4.( : Ti
,'5 4•,: 3.,....0.0%V i.r...I......A.5-....... �.......•'.. r. M 0000."
................................r..4........
r...•..m. .w..0..0w.14•0II c.6.r.. v >n
55..r.w....,..Mr.�..'.,r w..il.•.y w..3.....wr..w�.w•, .. , . .. 3...114• •0000060 .,w...» ,.. WatAa•.r n+...n.w....mn...»n...'......t..o
..4. . ,...n.w......w�O.....•n..Mn 4.4.44f4.•amn 5-..•.A
0..01•wl•wm0.NO e... 0101..,.w.......e. •w ww.ww.w►..,,77.„:„..4 1 .5 n'.., vw.... ..eaan.4 •Orr'••«w» 0000. ro... ..:1:4.: .0..�w f..wo.mrn'«•........wsq.•..wrwwww:3.....w••..:
.........s....+M•4w r.... •s r,...♦ . 4•.6. >.�i.... •1.n G».r.,�w,w+.b rrw.�.w..+1104no»,.n 1.14,•1rr..r...nan>� •r mop am4.+,..,4.<I<.�ef 4.14 5, ••.0.000. .<...00.040.. o......s.... . 14.. ws..ra>.n.5.a0.04..0...w.,.'r.:e r�^_�40asm w,.»=..4..4.•.4T.� • � tla,r50.l.rw.,.ww.w.4.nn4wr 14.3..0... 5.e• .....5.4.4 w�.r,ro.r5-.•"•••.. ,•wQ0 ....4 1000.0.0..4�f04.43. .0000 M'r.+..�,n.'mo4.w.�or a�a.�.wr.
014•'••0.5.••10 moo...•.•.»14'.5514.00,0 ...c5-b...:.,.P..,..14.4 ..w... 14...114 .......w _or.so•........................... *a •nw..r..r4aw
n.414.414.14140.!f•6 -•-r'- m .4014..5.w .n5-n5. w ....w.r.1•...n „„.„ .r.•rn Co....o........1...........................
144.•0, .....*ON »0.
1.01[0. •55,,,,, . .v.•o••+.aa..e.lsa,.w.awn �c•�.w�4r.+nMw•14143.1 0000 .r...,......�w.. .n...... o.3..... "w...�d.:....s.....,Inw.
i.ar alivs~'r c.•�"ww, i:`iiva'•••.o
..�Ma' ,.-. 1.M.,w e..w1.w......1. 4..... V.000`..,+.14.��6.• Ma..Ma 1..« ......n3.. 4' .-,.•..I r
...... '.w•4"+r:0..•,�0w .. •.,�•Ha.1�1
:�.i...,m... - 14.4.4..
.
140.
h...............'...b•►se• 2,0 MM. .................. '61 .+a 114, 1-.. ».. 14.14 ax r ..........
.5-w r o novr.f. ..655 5............ .•I..SO,a
'."..w 6.•..v 5-.r.•].,, I''•M Om, 4.•4. .w.Cn 5-140•.
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plon: Investing in Colorado's Future
•
Bicycle and Pedestrian Element
The passage of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) has
given greater emphasis to the role bicycle and pedestrian facilities play in the
transportation system. The U.S. Department of Transportation's "'P'olicy
Statement on Integrating Bicycle and Walking into the Transportation
Infrastructure' provides guidance to transportation agencies for incorporating
bicycle and pedestrian facilities into transportation projects.
The Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) recognizes the benefits of
nonmotorized transportation and recommends the use of bicycling and walking
for commuting, errands, travel to and from school, and for recreation. In addition
to being very energy efficient forms of transportation, bicycling and walking
include other benefits such as improved health, less stress, and reductions in air
pollution. traffic congestion, and energy consumption. Whereas walking is
practical for trips of approximately two miles, bicycling offers the opportunity ro
travel efficiently for trips of ten miles or less and either mode can be combined
with transit for longer trips.
CDOT recently commissioned a study on "Bicycling and Walking' in Colorado:
The Economic Impact of Bicycling and Household Survey Results'. The results
of the study reveal that the total economic benefit from bicycling in Colorado is
over $1 billion annually. Between manufacturing, retail, tourism, and special
events, bicycling employs over 10,000 Coloradans with an annual payroll of over
$95 million.
In 1998, thirteen of Colorado's ski areas reported 1.38 million summer visitors.
They indicated that 699,000 of these visitors bicycled on their vacation
generating approximately $193 million in revenue. In surveys conducted oy
Winter Park and Aspen, Winter Park found that 25% of their visitors came ;o
bicycle and Aspen reported that 20%of their visitors indicated bicycling was very
important. When the actual numbers submitted by the ski areas are combined
with the surveys, it is estimated that at least 276,400 visitors came primarily to
bicycle. If these visitors altered their vacation destination due to the lack of
bicycling opportunities, it would result in the loss of nearly$76 million in revenue.
The Household Survey mentioned above indicates that 69% of the households in
Colorado own at least one bicycle and the average is 2.7 per household. There
are 3 million bicycles in Colorado! Approximately 34% of Colorado citizens live
within 5 miles of work and 2.1% travel to work by bicycle and :3.3% by walking.
This compares to 81% of the survey's respondents that drive alone to work. Of
those traveling to school, 6.1% bicycle and 7.8% walk. The factors that prevent
people from bicycling and walking include time of day, distance, weather. traffic
• ----•
64 Passenger Mobility
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
♦
conditions on the street, lack of off street bicycle paths, lack of shoulders, poor
road maintenance, no showers at their destination,and discourteous motorists.
When asked about their preferences regarding bicycle-related public
expenditures, 79% indicated they would approve funding for bicycle facilities to
encourage bicycling as a means of transportation and 51% would reallocate
funds from other transportation projects to create a statewide bicycle
transportation system. Nearly 63% prefer paved, off street bike paths, but also
support the construction and maintenance of shoulders on roadways.
There are approximately 1,000 crashes each year involving bicyclists and
motorists and in 1999, six bicyclists and 57 pedestrians were killed in Colorado.
CDOT's Bicycle/Pedestrian Program is a resource for current developments,
standards, and practices in facility design, planning, and engineering.
CDOT is also responding to citizen concerns expressed in the bicycling and
walking research study as to the lack of education of motorists, bicyclists, and
pedestrians regarding their rights and responsibilities when sharing the road. The
CDOT Bicycle/Pedestrian Program is responsible for educating pedestrians,
bicyclists, and motorists of all ages regarding the rules of the road and trail,
appropriate traffic behaviors, and how to share the road safely and cooperatively
with other modes of transportation.
In June of 1999, the Transportation Commission passed a Shoulder Policy
(902.0) and a Resolution (TC•747) to address some of the concerns expressed
above. CDOT's policy is to incorporate shoulder improvements on state
highways "whenever an upgrade of the roadways and structures is being
implemented and is technically feasible and economically reasonable." The
Transportation Commission Resolution states that:
• "Bicycling and walking are integral components of Colorado's multi-
modal transportation system and shall be considered when all CDOT
projects are scoped."
• "Shoulder improvements should be included in all new alignment; major
reconstruction; bridge replacements, reconstruction or rehabilitation; and
minor widening."
• "Existing shoulders shall be included in resurfacing projects where
needed."
• "Paved shoulders should be at least 6' wide to accommodate bicycle
travel and rumble strips along High Priority Bicycle Corridors."
• "Rumble Strips may be installed on shoulders which are 4' or narrower
only when there is a history of run-off-the-road crashes consistent with
the system-wide evaluation."
• ♦
Passenger Mobility 65
. The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
The Transportation Commission directed the CDOT Bicycle/Pedestrian Program
staff to revise the High Priority Bicycle Corridors previously adopted in the 2015
Transportation Plan to reflect higher and lower priority bicycle corridors. In order
Draft Colorado Bicycle Corridors Map to recommend revisions CDOT staff sought input from the bicycle community
included in the 7-5-2000 draft has been
removed. A revised map is being citizens, CDOT region staff, and the transportation planning regions throughout
developed through the Commission's the state via a series of Bicycle Town Meetings in 32 cities across the state wit
Intermodal Committee to be presented to over 1,000 participants. Those recommendations were then presented to the
the full Commission at a later date. Regional Planning Commissions for review and comment.
The Transportation Commission's Intermodal Committee is revising the draft
map, considering the public comments as well as other factors such as projects
already within the Plan, resurfacing projects where shoulders could be included
as part of the project scope, and proximity to communities of 5,000 or more. The
full Transportation Commission will consider the revised map and adoption it-
expected at a later date.
Bicycle and Pedestrian
Project Summary The Regional Transportation Plans identified over $.088 billion for bicycle and
Fiscally Constrained $.088B pedestrian projects in their regional constrained plans and $0.96 billion in the
Regionally Preferred Plans. Most of these projects consisted of off-street shared-
Unfunded Projects $0.96B use paths although bike lane projects were also identified.
•
66 Passenger Mobility
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
♦
Transportation Demand Management
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) is a set of actions to move more
people in fewer vehicles in order to increase the person carrying capacity of the
transportation system. Most TDM programs focus efforts on programs that
encourage fewer and shorter trips, spreading peak hour traffic over a wider time
frame and promoting the use of alternative modes. The following efforts are
typical of TDM programs:
• Carpooling programs match people who live and work in the same
general vicinity and have expressed interest in the program. Carpool
programs are currently offered by the Denver Regional Council of
Governments RideArrangers), North Front Range pMARTTrips), and
Colorado Springs(RIDEFINDERS).
• Vanpool programs also match people who live and work in the same
general vicinity, but the program also provides the vans used by the
matched groups. Vanpool programs are currently being offered by
DRCOG, North Front Range(VanGo), and Colorado Springs.
• Guaranteed Ride Home programs provide a free taxi ride home for
someone who has taken another mode to work and has an unexpected
change in work schedule or an emergency. Currently, DRCOG, North
Front Range,and CDOT offer Guaranteed Ride Home programs.
• Flextime programs give employees the option of changing their starting
and ending times each workday while maintaining their usual number of
work hours each day. This helps reduce congestion in the peak travel
period.
• Telecommute programs allow people to work at home one or more days
a week. These programs eliminate the trips to and from work.
• Teleconference programs allow people to use a phone or audio-video
facilities to meet with other people rather than driving to a central facility.
• Employer programs promote the use of alternative modes among their
respective employees. Typically, Transportation Coordinators are
appointed within each company to reach out to the employees to
educate them regarding the availability and use of alternative modes.
• Reduced Transit Fare programs are promoted to individuals and
organizations to increase bus ridership.
• Web sites/information kiosks/brochures are created to increase people's
awareness regarding the availability of alternative modes.
One measure of how many people are carpooling is vehicle occupancy.
Statewide, the occupancy rate is 1.5 persons/car. Occupancy rates range from a
low of 1.1 for work trips to 2.5 for recreational trips. Vehicle occupancy rates will
♦
Passenger Mobility 67
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future_♦
Transportation
Demand be monitored on a yearly basis to determine whether the rates are increasing or
Management
decreasing.
_ Project Summary
Approximately $0.010 billion is included in the Constrained Regional Plans for
Fiscally Constrained $0.01oB
TDM programs and an additional$0.017 billion in TDM programs are included in
Unfunded Projects $0.017B the Regionally Preferred Plans.
Aviation Element
The Colorado Aviation System is comprised of 79 public use airports ranging
from commercial service airports(e.g., Denver International Airport and Colorado
Springs)to general aviation airports(e.g., Springfield and Nucla.)This network of
airports serves a variety of transportation needs, providing a vital link in the
overall statewide multi-modal transportation system. Colorado's rugged
mountains and vast plains require an efficient transportation system to enable
quick access to remote locations. The traveling public is increasingly depending
on aviation to accommodate their transportation needs. Not only does the
statewide aviation system provide essential access for these critical activities: i*
also generates billions of dollars in economic benefits, including thousands of
jobs.
According to a study completed in 1998, the Colorado Aviation System
the Colorado aviation system generates over$14.3 billion in annual economic activity, generates 4.6 billion in
annual eamings and creates 246,000 jobs throughout Colorado. Annually, the
generates !i14.3 billion annually
Colorado Aviation System accommodates a total of 8.5 million visitors who
spend $5.2 billion in Colorado. Nearly 90 % of these visitors (7.5 million) arrive
via scheduled air service, the other 1.0 million visitors arrive via general aviation
aircraft. The Colorado Aviation System also provides congestion relief to highway
corridors like 1-70 through the use of airports located at Aspen, Eagle and Rifle.
Based on the number of enplanements at the Eagle and Aspen airports, plus
passengers arriving by private and general aviation aircraft at the Eagle, Aspen.
Rifle, and Glenwood Springs airports, it is estimated that almost 1 million vehicle
trips are taken off the 1-70 corridor annually because of the utilization of these
airports.
Airports throughout Colorado are owned and operated by local governments with
grant funding assistance from the Colorado Aeronautical Board and Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA). Not all airports in Colorado receive funding
assistance from the FAA. which provides approximately 90% of eligible airport
improvement and development costs. To be eligible for FAA grant. funding
airports must be identified as essential to a balanced national air transportation
system. The National Plan of Integrated Airports System (NPIAS) has identified
48 airports within Colorado as being eligible for grant funding under the FAA
Airport Improvement Program. A four-year air transportation-funding bill titled
"AIR 21"was passed in March of 2000, covering the period 2000 -2003. AIR 21
♦ ----.
68 Passenger Mobility
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future• .
provides approximately 40% more funding for airport improvement and
development projects for eligible Colorado Airports.
The FAA provides three funding categories for airports in Colorado. The first
category consists of Entitlement Funds, which are granted to commercial service
airports that enplane over 10,000 passengers annually. These airports receive
an annual entitlement amount each year for capital development projects which
is based on the total number of enplaned passengers for each airport. The
minimum entitlement has been raised under AIR 21 from $500,000 to $650,000
for 2000 and $1 million in 2001. Entitlement amounts range from $5.1 million at
DIA to the minimum entitlement at Gunnison, Montrose, Durango, and Telluride.
These airports can compete for the second category of federal funds, FAA
discretionary funds, on a priority basis within the FAA's Northwest Mountain
Region(Wyoming, Washington, Utah,Oregon, Montana, Idaho, and Colorado
The third category of FM funding, State Apportionment funds, are used for
general aviation and commercial service airports that do not enplane 10,000
annual passengers.Examples include Cortez's and Alamosa's airports. Annually,
Colorado receives $8 million to fund projects at the 38 airports eligible to
compete for state apportionment funding. Discretionary funding is also available
for projects with the highest priority within the state apportionment category
throughout the FAA Northwest Mountain Region.
State funding for the aviation system comes through discretionary grants from
the Colorado Aeronautical Board. The Colorado Aviation Fund is comprised of a
portion of state sales and excise taxes on aviation fuel and distributed annually
through local grants by the Colorado Aeronautical Board. State funding averages
$2.5 million annually and may be used for any airport that is publicly owned and
open for public use. With limited financial resources available for Colorado
airports, there is a constant struggle to maintain the current system's facilities
and to meet safety standards. In addition, rapid growth in population and tourism
have increased demand for airport services and facilities, placing pressure on
some airports to expand or upgrade.
�C •
Passenger Mobility 69
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future+
FAA Funding
FAA Funding
2001 -2020
(Dollars in Millions)
Entitlement
$13.17 Discretionary
$13.80
State
Apportionment
$7.01
To assist the Colorado Aeronautical Board and the FAA in making efficieit
funding decisions with limited financial resources, the Colorado Aviation Systems
Plan was developed and will be finalized by the summer of 2000. The primary
goal of the plan is to examine the adequacy of Colorado's system of airports to
determine the ability of the system to meet both current and future aviation needs
on a statewide basis.
Before the adequacy of the airport system can be measured, first it was
necessary to determine each airport's current performance and what each airport
contributes to the overall system. To identify the functional level of each airport,
five criteria were used to develop an overall functional level for each airport.
These criteria included:
• Activity-the existing and forecasted level of aviation activity;
• Expandability - each airport's ability to accommodate future airside and
land-side facilities;
• Economics - the economic benefit that each airport provides the
community it serves
• Coverage/Emergency - each airport's ability to serve a distinct
geographic area and to support health services where no or limited
hospital services are available; and
• Investment - the level of investment that historically has taken place at
each system airport.
Based on the rating and ranking process using these criteria, the system airports
were divided into three functional levels: Major, Intermediate, and Minor (see
map on page 72). Performance measures have been developed within each
•
70 Passenger Mobility
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.
airport functional level with the highest standards set for the major airport
category, and the lowest set for the minor airport category. The airport functional
roles and performance measures developed within each functional level will be
used as a tool in determining future funding decisions by the Colorado
Aeronautical Board and the FAA. The final Colorado Systems Plan document will
be provided to each of the Transportation Planning Regions and Metropolitan
Planning Regions by mid- summer 2000 to be used as guidance throughout the
next regional and statewide transportation plan update cycle.
Estimated revenues total $0.20 billion; leaving a deficit of approximately $0.17
billion. The total 20-year aviation needs in the state are estimated to total $0.37 Aviation
billion (not including Denver International Airport or other metropolitan area Project Summary
airport needs). Aviation system needs for the Denver, Colorado Springs, and Fiscally Constrained $0206
North Front Range metropolitan areas are being considered while these three
MPOs update their regional plans to 2025, which is currently underway. Unfunded Projects $0 17B
•
Passenger Mobility 71
•..: .: .- ... ... ...• . .. .. .,, 'I.:.. ......:.,;a ..... ..:. ............. .. ::"-•::'Y.:CKji�st'!44,."'. . e`ii„i...,.,4.Jw.nf ri^: ..
1 urafi . Functional Level of Colorado Airports AMMO{ t_
1 1CO M 1
C, i Mete
04144410/MI '',t, PORT cows{DQIV:TO,. 'F ITL 1IO �{
r, _. + POST DOwsst.OVfLMO ; ,
RNAYIDAtetNNe/l McIWNt
40 rJr.svHu.►[oo.Ja { mamma*,
t
Upel stinn<, rl«tr lllAew E ,•ryt
s voce'map + • f i�
9 laso.ar u.wUVOlA1eGG �. $ + 1 s ;
.•i .f941 wft.tor.”..,0 + louaou 4, . 'union=&NAR �D:Y: r
JOT 1,40.00 ' .'y 147) ::q11
i AlrltNellll _ y '5
... UOIe CO.bG D.4 �•.. .... -.
.: .,.,
t T i .;.. rAMelNA1NAMt I +, .1
ct . <) lrtlelO CO r�oNJL • .....,; • - J •T.' Aleilow. � '
•
Ar•d
.� YID/ W • i .t
gr(AAAD.tO
•
.4. 111.4 OC ( I
•
SARnttl
. mlelADo..,e.w.r1 ..
1101111110111111011.111 'iluArrlA ••
i• Noma lw •Or�rir0l/ maolADO e.r.ce �, .
t .otaweleo
lelellelRtOlAL MIIPeUMAIIN lt/
W so y ."°/
`-, `, ` 50 `t + 1NleRco
W11rMe/lle 'J .... , -
} . •tUaMeMl 50 Warn �.
4: AVER WU, ,7,2. I
..::;:,.. ,I. . 1•LL oN le 1)Lk LAMM, WMIM/HtrMp '
1,M 11.Y CO WINNAL ' ', 1
•
olL.wn {f1elP
MMMMNWIIAINte F ;a i
!` 180 s
88 YNRlW1A 1 t' k₹
•. . • 1 wewsuwult AMNs0flNty Viz:_,;
�'"� \ Functional Level ,"�
ODRti .'AIMYANARM1,e NAN 11A/rALLlt �l •f}:;}:i}
•
'RMget,D .KM,.,Ores . R,y� ".:1
•ovlAlmuww.11w i ktennediN,•1,',4‘,1"°".°.""
VAA 1M/lle eAI s�_�_�,elm 1ArMX .. _ilktltpr pYlya.N., 4..w#MX00^ NI�W Ii erk6 � :` L x OS '
£ a.' q � f
. StlrYW r•A, 9F4'
rr .•
.._..-_._ . ,,.....,:-....-.!..!;,,y,:
...�� ... 4 ......-�-_..ra.r...« Y
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.
Intelligent Transportation Systems
WHAT Is ITS?
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) is a widely used term to describe a
collection of advanced transportation technologies and applications of
information processing techniques to improve transportation system efficiency,
safety, and convenience. It applies not only to passenger vehicles, but also to
commercial vehicle operations, transit systems and other multi-modal activities.
These "smart" systems are both urban and rural in scope and are being adopted
not only by CDOT but also by a variety of other transportation-related agencies in
Colorado and around the world.
ITS is a management tool that can help maximize existing facilities by enhancing
the mobility and safety of the motoring public. Some of the more successful ITS
systems include: Advanced Traffic Management System (ATMS), Advanced
Traveler Information System (ATIS), Commercial Vehicle Operations (CVO) and
Advanced Public Transportation System(APTS).
ATMS utilize, evaluate and analyze information that is collected from various
devices to address and mitigate freeway incidents and congestion. National
studies for typical metropolitan areas show that 50% of the capacity of an urban ITS helps mcximize the potential of
freeway system is lost due to non-reoccurring incidents such as accidents, existing transportation infrastructure
spilled loads and stalled vehicles. They also show that if a stalled vehicle blocks
one lane out of three, the capacity of the freeway is reduced by half. Even if the
disabled vehicle or vehicles are moved to the shoulder of the freeway, the
system capacity is still reduced by about 15%.
Delays in clearing incidents are also costly. These studies show that for every
minute it takes to clear an incident from a freeway there will be an average of
four additional minutes in clearing the queue that has formed behind the stopped
vehicles. In addition, some cities report that 10% to 15% of their freeway
accidents are "secondary collisions" caused by vehicles coming upon the back-
up queue of cars from incidents that have occurred earlier but which still have not
been cleared.
ATIS disseminates accurate real-time information about transportation options
and conditions to travelers so that they can use it to make decisions that facilitate
their travel needs. Information is provided to the traveler through variable
message signs, highway advisory radios, 1-800 numbers, pager and cell phone
reports from private partners web sites, kiosks, traffic and weather channels,
broadcast faxes and press releases. This allows the traveler to exercise choices
concerning their travel; from taking alternative forms of travel, modifying travel
times and/or routes or choosing not to travel.
•
Passenger Mobility 73
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
•
ITS SIRATEGICWORK PLAN ANDITS BJSINESSPLAN
The ITS Strategic Work Plan was developed in 1998. It is consistent with
CDOT's mission and is intended to give direction to CDOT's ITS efforts through
the vision, mission, goals and objectives that were developed as part of the Plan.
It provides guidance for planning ITS projects on CDOT facilities and encourages
opportunities for CDOT to work with other agencies to realize a statewide vision
for ITS in Colorado. In addition, it states a strategic commitment regardirg
CDOT's support, outlines critical building blocks and the ITS Business Plan
process and identifies roles and responsibilities of the ITS Office and the ITS
Steering Committee.
The ITS FY 1999-2003 Business Plan was developed using an abbreviated
version of the planning process outlined in the ITS Strategic Plan. The ITS
Steering Committee developed program areas and project evaluation criteria that
reflected the mission, goals and objectives of the ITS Strategic Plan Several
workshops were conducted to solicit input and project requests from CDCT
Regions. TPRs and private industry. Seven program areas were developed that
directly supported the ITS Strategic Plan. They are: System Maintenance,
Operation and Integration, Traveler Information — Collection and Dissemiration,
Active System management — Travel and Traffic, Incidert Management,
Commercial Vehicle Operations and Updating Legacy Systems. These program
areas were used to identify and categorize projects for the Business Plan.
Projects categorized in the program areas were combined into Focus Area
Packages, which outlined the strategy for ITS deployment in a systematic
manner within the specific focus area. The Plan also identified funding levels,
project budgets,timelines and project participants.
ITS R;OJECTSIDENTIFIED IN THISTATEWIDEPLAN
As mentioned previously, the ITS Business Plan outlined project and integration
activity deployment over a five-year period These activities are estimated at$37
Intelligent
Transportation million, which includes annual operation of the Traffic Operations Center.
Systems maintenance of the ITS devices and CDOT Region ITS activities. Also, tie
Project Summary Business Plan identifies another$15 million in unfunded demanc.
Fiscally Constrained $0.59B The 2020 Statewide Plan has $0.59 billion dollars for ITS in the constrained
Unfunded Projects $0.22B element, and an additional $0.22 billion in unfunded ITS projects. It is difficult to
determine if the ITS "pooled" funds contained in the Statewide Transportation
Plan overlap the ITS Business Plan.
COLORADOTRANSPORTATIOWANAGEM ENTSYSTE:M
The Colorado Transportation Management System (CTMS) is a statewide
transportation management and traveler information system, and is also CDOT's
• ----4
74 Passenger Mobility
„The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.
current program to expand, enhance and augment deployment and integration of
the state's ITS. CDOT recognizes that in addition to deploying field devices, (DOf is pufnering with the private s cfoi
integration of ITS control centers; communications; and control, monitoring and to build o high-speed fiber opfii
information dissemination subsystems is fundamental to the CTMS' ultimate borbuilde high-speed
-in e d fiber opts
success. The CTMS has a two-fold purpose: 1)to deploy additional field devices
and communications infrastructure (to increase overall volume, reliability and
flow of data); and 2) to increase systems integration (to enhance timeliness and
utility of data for CTMS operators and the public).
CDOT has selected CTMS work tasks using five considerations: 1) maximize
private sector in-kind participation; 2) focus on integration; 3) use a modular
approach to integrate "pieces" of the system as they are done; 4) use initial
integration' activities as a "blueprint" for future, expanded integration; and 5)
select projects which best "fit" CDOT's ITS Business Plan in terms of vision,
mission,goals,objectives and program areas.
When fully built out, CDOT will have access to a high-speed fiber optic backbone
paralleling the majority of the Interstate highways (and some other state
highways) from border to border. A smaller, localized communications ring is
also being established within the Denver area.
Multi-agency partnerships are crucial to the successful implementation of
projects such as CTMS. CDOT's public partners include the City & County of
Denver, the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG), the Cities of
Colorado Springs and Aurora, the Regional Transportation District and the
Colorado State Patrol. Other partners that have emerged include Douglas
County, and the City of Lakewood. Additional partnerships have been identified
and are being developed as work on the Southeast Corridor begins.
Telecommunications
The State of Colorado envisions a state of the art statewide telecommunications
network to support the communication needs of its citizens, businesses and
industry, government, educational and medical institutions, public and private
organizations and others.
Towards this vision, the State developed a strategy for a multi-use fiber optic
network (MNT) in order to connect all state government offices and educational
institutions across the state. The MNT identifies 76 Aggregated Network Access
Points (ANAPs), basically one per county, where telecommunication traffic
associated with state offices and agencies can be aggregated for cost
effectiveness. Implementation of the MNT will be occurring through public/private
partnerships.
In 1998, Colorado's Legislature passed House bill 991102, which provides
funding to local entities for the link from their locations to the ANAP site. This
�--- •
Passenger Mobility 75
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future•
public sector activity has the ability to stimulate private sector investment in
telecommunications infrastructure around the state.
CDOT's interest in telecommunications is strictly limited to transportation related
needs such as enhancing transportation system operations through the
exchange of information on traffic conditions, hazardous conditions, road
closures, incident management, transit, rail, airline scheduling information, route
planning, etc. In order to move forward with implementing its Intelligent
Transportation System (ITS) initiatives requiring advanced telecommunications
networks provided by the private sector, the Transportation Commission
approved CDOT to enter into public/private partnerships. The first such
partnership is the Shared Resources Effort, where CDOT offers use of its
highway right-of-way to private sector telecommunications providers. Through
this partnership, CDOT receives advanced telecommunication network access
for linking its transportation facilities and for ITS deployment.
The Southwest , Gunnison Valley, and San Luis Valley Transportation Planning
Regions consider the development of telecommunications to be a significant
element of their transportation plans. To that end, the TPRs developed the
following vision of telecommunications in the region:
"Our vision is the deployment of a robust, wide-band, high
speed, redundant, fiber optic and wireless telecommunication
network with sufficient capacity for future growth linking all
strategic cities and towns in our region. These city and
community networks will then be connected to a public
telecommunications backbone for deployment to the worldwide
telecommunications infrastructure. The use of this network
should be open to reasonable competition among multiple
providers, and the company or companies providing the capital
to install new infrastructure should be provided ample resources.,
funding, and every opportunity to recapture their investment with
profit.
The Transportation Commission provided the following guidance for
Telecommunications concerning transportation planning, programming, anc
funding:
• In response to the CDOT Mission to provide the pest multi-modal
transportation system for Colorado that most effectively moves people
goods, and information, the Transportation Commission's interest in
"moving information" is restricted to ITS implementation and ensuring its
Department buildings and operations centers are interlinked -or
communication and operational purposes. In no way should the
Transportation Commission's interest be interpreted to be in competition
with private sector telecommunications providers.
76 Passenger Mobility
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plon: Investing in Colorado's Future.
• Regional Planning Commissions are encouraged to consider ITS and
transportation-related telecommunications projects within their regional
plans. These projects will compete for transportation funding made
available to the CDOT Regions for regional priorities.
Regional Planning Commissions are not precluded from incorporating non-
transportation telecommunications projects and programs within their regional
transportation plans but the Transportation Commission has determined these
non-transportation telecommunications projects and programs ineligible for
funding with revenues allocated by the Transportation Commission.
Roadway Assessment (pp. 77-81)has bean
Roadway Assessment revised from the 7-5-2000 draft by
incorporating,roadway inventory
information from other section of thi report
The presence of an extensive public roadway system, low population densities, and expanding the discussion.
and historical dependence on automobiles contributes significantly to ------- — --
automobiles being the most popular form of transportation in Colorado. Although
this preference will continue in the future, public awareness of traffic congestion, Public Roadway
environmental issues, physical constraints, and financial limitations is leading to System- 1999
a more balanced approach to mobility in Colorado. One example is the use of State 9,147 miles
High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes, which increase person carrying capacity
compared to general purpose lanes used by single occupant automobiles. Local (cityicountv)._ 71,107 miles
Another example is providing mass transit in combination with highway Total 80,254 milts
improvements in heavily traveled corridors.
Autos, trucks, buses, and bicycles utilize Colorado's public roadways and users
of this system expect a seamless experience in terms of ease of access, physical
conditions, and safety. The entities responsible for maintaining and improving the
public roadway system, including the Colorado Department of Transportation,
municipal, and county governments, strive to achieve this seamlessness tor
public roadway users.
The interaction of these vehicles is taken into account in the planning process,
resulting in a variety of recommendations, such as:
• Safety improvements (channelizing intersections, adding or widening
shoulders,signs,guardrails, bus pullouts,sidewalks,etc.)
• Capacity improvements (new highway lanes, HOV/bus lanes, passing
lanes,climbing lanes, bicycle lanes,etc.)
• Travel demand management strategies(carpooling,telecommuting, etc.)
• Traffic operations and management strategies (ramp metering, traffic
signal timing, incident management, etc.)
• Interrnodal connections (e.g., park-n-ride lots)
4 •
Passenger Mobility 77
. The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future♦
ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS
Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT) is often used as an indicator of increased traffic
- which leads to congestion. VMT measures the miles of use on the roadway
Toad system and State Daily VMT
Trends Graph(p.78)has been revised system. The graph above shows that from 1990 to 1998 the number of daily
from the 7-5-2000 draft to include local vehicle miles traveled has steadily increased. VMT increases are due in part to
system daily VMT data. _ the state's population increase, increases in the number of trips made and trip
length, and reduced vehicle occupancy. The map on page 82 illustrates where
on the state highway system congestion is occurring. The measure 'o'
congestion represented on this map is traffic volume equal to or greater than
85% of capacity. It should be noted that congestion in urban areas occurs more
frequently, and for longer periods,than in rural areas.
Daily VMT Totals
120.000.000
1 b0,000.000 £
44
t 4Y+k P 01[ w e
N0.000.000
tkU x.v ,1
80,000.000
-
4.
wds t, , ,da
to ; , r �,w, c, a 3a
40 000.0D0
,�y, ow,,y+lrr ':, 5er `• yy
20.000.000
165 million doily vehicle miles of travel 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998
projected by 2020! Year
(— Total System —0—State Highways —Local Roadways
CDOT's 1997 Mobility Survey provides insight into public perception concerning
congestion. 73% of the respondents to the 1997 survey indicated their belief that
travel has gotten more difficult over the past several years, with 40%citing traffic
congestion as the reason. Although a different question was asked in CDOT's
March 2000 Customer Survey, congestion [too many cars on the road] was cited
by 38% of the respondents asked why their commute takes longer than usual.
With 81% of the 2000 survey respondents commuting to work alone in their
vehicles (up from 77% in the 1997 surveyj, it is not surprising that daily VMT is
projected to grow to 165 million by 2020. The projected congestion during sigh
• ------•
78 Passenger Mobility
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future*
use periods is illustrated on the map on page 83 and can be compared to current
mobility conditions illustrated on page 82.
SURFACECONDITION
Roadway surface is monitored to determine overall condition and provide
information regarding treatments necessary to improve the smoothness and
rideability of the pavement, extend useful pavement life, and delay costly
reconstruction. Three general roadway condition states are used in this
monitoring process, using"remaining surface life"as the primary indicator:
• Good (having 12 or more years of remaining service life);
• Fair(6 to 11 years); and,
• Poor(less than 6 years).
In 1999, 52%of the state highway surface condition was rated as Good or Fair.
Surface Condition
State Highway Surface Condition
1993 - 1999
100 7777rnt ,. ,r rr„t .4
ri 40
30
20
10
0 �.�_ . �..._...__ _..�..
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999
The Transportation Commission allocated $2.3 billion in funding for the surface
treatment program. However, an additional $300 million is needed to achieve Surface Condition
the Commission's objective of 60% of the state highway pavement in Good or Project Summary
Fair condition. This additional $300 million is included in the unfunded portion of Fiscally Constrained $1.36_
the statewide plan.
Unfunded Project $t.3B
♦
Passenger Mobility 79
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
♦
BRIDGES
There are 8,413 bridges on Colorado's public roadway system; 3,709 are on the state
highway system (noted as"on-system" bridges)whereas the remaining 4,600 bridges
are"off-system"and under the jurisdiction of counties and municipalities.
Systematic inspections of bridges are performed and data that is collected for
numerous structural and operational characteristics are used in CDOT's bridge
management system. This system provides information to determine a "sufficiency
rating" between 1 and 100, with 100 depicting excellent condition. In addition to the
Bridge sufficiency rating, bridge inspection information is used to identify structurally deficient
_ Project Summary (SD) or functionally obsolete (F0) bridges. A bridge is structurally deficient (rearing
the end of its useful life) if the structural integrity fails specific criteria defined by the
Fiscally Constrained $0.72B
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). A bridge is classifies as functionally
Unfunded Projects $0.0036 obsolete if the bridge fails FHWA serviceability criteria. Current information from the
Bridge Management system is illustrated in the graphs below.
Structurally Deficient Bridges- 1998
350 -
300
250 -
200 - - ■SR 50 -80-
150 o SR 0-50
100 - --
50
on system off system
The Transportation Commission allocated $0.72 billion in funding for this. program
Additional bridge needs are identified beyond the fiscally constrained plan.
SAFETY
Safety
Project Summary While traffic volume is continuing to increase, the statewide fatal crash rate on the
Fiscally Constrained $0.556B highway system is decreasing, from 1.63 in 1995 to 1.38 in 1998. This decrease can
be attributed to a number of factors, including programs focused on impaired driving,
Unfunded Projects $0.335B aggressive driving, restraint usage, improved roadway design, better traffic
♦ -----♦
80 Passenger Mobility
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Pion: Investing in Colorado's Future.
enforcement, and vehicle safety features, etc. Safety was an issue considered in
each of the Transportation Planning Regions, and many projects identified through
the regional transportation planning process have potential safety benefits even if the
project is primarily described as addressing mobility or system quality.
In addition to CDOT's driver related safety programs, the Transportation Commission
allocated $0.556 billion for its signing and striping programs. Additionally, $0.335
billion is allocated to the Safety Pool to be allocated based on the Safety
Roundtable's recommendations. Safety-related projects and programs account for
7% of the fiscally constrained element of the 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan.
NOISE BARRIERS ANDRESTAREAS
The fiscally constrained statewide plan identifies$4.9 million for Type II noise barriers
at selected locations and $14 million to achieve planned improvements to rest areas.
The Type II Noise Barrier program sunsets in 2002 and the Rest Area Program
sunsets in 2004. Beyond that, projects will compete for Other Regional Priority
Funds.
MAINTENANCE ANDOPERATI0NS
State Highway System Maintenance includes routine activities such as blading
roadway surfaces and shoulders, fence repair, roadway sweeping, mowing
vegetation and litter removal in the right of way, as well as snow and ice control.
The fiscally constrained statewide plan identifies $3 billion to achieve an overall "Bt"
rating for these activities. Achieving a level of service "A" would require an additional Transportation is a key aspect of
$213 million. qualify of life in Colorado
State Highway System Maintenance, which includes snow and ice removal, mowing,
sweeping, maintaining tunnels, rest areas, etc. The fiscally constrained statewide
plan identifies $3 billion to achieve an overall "B+" rating for these activities. An
additional $213 million would be needed to bring the level of service up to an "A"
rating.
Much of the Transportation Commission's guidance for the 2020 Statewide
Transportation Plan focuses on maintaining the current state highway system, by
judiciously increasing the number of centerline miles under CDOT's responsibility,
focusing CDOT revenue on the state highway system, and maximizing the efficiency Maintenance and Operations
of the current system before adding capacity.
Project Summary
The majority of the projects and programs contained in the 2020 Statewide Plan are Fiscally Constrained $13.88B
related to highways. The Regional Planning Commissions identified $13.88 billion for Unfunded Projects $13.98B
highway projects in their constrained plans and $13.98 billion in the Regionally
Preferred Plans.
• •
Passenger Mobility 81
Mobility Conditions on Colorado State Highways
jBased on 1999 Design Hourly Volumes) N
--n
J \ 'OP 01 IIN=
ST FA AT SV0N3 1 t-
1 'I1IW R (( 4(jlay •`L ` 74
I
I i f ry � i I I
IV PNILJFe --Pl N
17 :
a
KKFIAFSi t /'`�
} ` NUA WS@NGS
--.. Ji-
.. MtMP�SF _ f L
. ' ti.I' I // CANJNC. r
r- r--'- a \ , I n r_
i- . -- , --A _
.,
ry URS
I -'N I ____I S LMIPR
_� n. / L.i /f/ IA MTA
r I i ILA `r.T,an7. / v� . _
I__ 1 / 1 N.T.
Highways - -
Uncongested -- u UU<ViC<U.85 WC = volume-to-capacity ratio
N Some Congestion -- 0.85<V/C<1.20 Design volume = the 30th highest hourly volume
Mobility Conditions in Colorado State Highways
(Estimated 2020 Design Hourly Volumes) N
j
.R.. r —, A
I 1G iSPRM4c BA �M�:R _�
A
---\
,...,,,,,....„
( NR„V i
r( �1 E ie .rt:Y, I
9rrir i s zz
I I)I •
i (t.
I :. � _ _ I
uemswos�vuc - \
RC
i/ r
e x tt'KFDRES1,.._.
,F.A. i_,
1 f ` — J ' ttM.nan SPRN.3
m4 \-..
(ANON Ci
\\\Frp,...‘.. I ...._ ri —1
-1\-----;;> njnniThm --,
V i 4 NAM
i
S 1 i
."ar;; —{w., ._± t —�_
I «�. 1 ThiML. , l
,________c_ i\ —S— I I i
Highways
Uncongested 0.00<V/C<0.85 V/C = volume-to-capacity ratio
N Some Congestion 0.85<V/C<1.20 Design volume = the 30th highest hourly volume
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
COLORADO FREIGHT REPORT
Process
Colorado's 20 Year Transportation Plan adopted in 1996 clearly indicated that
freight planning should be more extensive in future statewide plans. Freight
planning has improved significantly with the completion of the Western
Transportation Trade Study (WTTN) studies, and the draft Colorado Statewide
Rail Needs Study (CSRNS) and draft Freight Infrastructure Study (FIS). In the
latter half of 1998 and all of 1999, CDOT collected data on freight movement
issues, concerns, and potential projects related to freight throughout most of
Colorado via the FIS. Draft FIS reports were available to the Transportation
Planning Region's (TPR's) in time to develop their regional plans. The FIS was
oriented toward trucking since recent rail studies included significant rail freight
data. The data within these and other studies are valuable to the transportation
planning process from the local to the statewide levels. The increasing use of the
transportation system, limited financial resources, and public expectations
demand more efficient and effective planning to support investments in the
transportation system.
FEDERAL FREIGHT PLANNING
In 1991 the federal government acknowledged the importance of freight mobility
in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA). Within the
legislation a variety of funding, planning, and other provisions and requirements
were adopted to support state and regional governments in freight transportation
planning activities. Subsequent to ISTEA, congress passed additional legislation
to accentuate freight transportation planning in a variety of ways. Additional
legislation included the National Highway System Designation Act in 1995, the
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century in 1998 and the Federal Motor
Carriers Safety Administration in 1999. The U.S. Department of Transportation's
development and adoption of a National Freight Transportation Policy Statement
and Guiding Principles in 1997 is a continuing effort to encourage freight
considerations in planning, programming, and project implementation.
COLORADO FREIGHT PLANNING
In Colorado, this and other aforementioned plans address freight transportation
through a number of considerations, recommendations and policies. In general
the plans support system quality, safety, and mobility of tie transportation
system not only for the traveling public but also for freight-haulers and shippers
84 Colorado Freight Report
•The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.
The Freight Infrastructure Study, regional transportation plans, and other local
transportation plans for metropolitan areas identify many transportation
objectives, actions, projects, and/or programs including freight mobility issues.
These plans are intended to be the sources of projects ultimately included in the
Statewide Transportation Improvement Program.
Freight and Colorado's Economy
During the 1990s, Colorado was the fifth fastest growing state in the United
States. The state grew by 761,660 people in the 90's to a population of
4,056,133. This growth in population and employment creates growth in all other
aspects of society, including the freight industry. Colorado's renowned livability
has been a major contributing factor to the population and employment turn-
around from the early 1980's when much of the state underwent a severe Colorado currently exports k billion o
international markets annually
economic recession. Further contributing to the tumaround was a conscious
effort to develop a more balanced economy that would be less adversely affected
by national and international swings in prosperity and decline.
Even though Colorado has been growing at a significant pace, on the national
scale it is relatively small state in terms of population and employment. Therefore
Colorado depends on bringing in money from other states and nations for a
considerable part of its economic livelihood. This includes income derived from
the export of agricultural, high technology, and other products as well as income
from tourism and a wide variety of businesses that sell their services to
customers outside the state.
"Colorado's central location within North America, its supportive business climate
and well-trained workforce, and the broad array of high-quality products found
locally add up to a formula for successful exporting" is the statement repeated
often at the Colorado International Trade Office. Colorado businesses currently
export about $6 billion (1/3 of that is to Canada and Mexico) worth of
manufactured and agricultural products annually. It is estimated that exporting
from the state supports about 65,000 jobs.
Canada, Japan, Germany, United Kingdom, and China are among Colorado's
major trading partners. Colorado has international trading offices in Osaka,
Japan; London, England; and Guadalajara, Mexico. Colorado ranks 13th
nationally in value of exports to Asia in 1996. Colorado's freight value moving in
international markets totaled $4.6 billion in the first 9 months of 1999. High
technology equipment accounted for 80%, by value, of Colorado's foreign trade
in 1999, up 13.3%from the same period in the previous year
In part because of the North American Free Trade Agreement, Colorado's trade
with Canada and Mexico continues to grow. Canada and Mexico account for
nearly $2.1 billion in imported and exported value and one and a quarter million
tons of imported goods traded with Colorado. Trucks move over 80% of
• •
Colorado Freight Report 85
•The 2O2O Statewide Transportation Plon: Investing in Colorado's Future
Colorado's freight to and from Canada and Mexico. The freight industry is also
the conduit for access to foreign markets in Colorado's export sector of the
economy to and from the Pacific Rim nations and Europe.
Freight is a major generator in moving Colorado's economy. Most freight moves
by truck, rail, air, and pipeline, with trucks and rail dominating the greatest
volume of freight moved nationally and in Colorado. This has created an
increasing demand on the rail and roadway system. Adequate, convenient and
reliable transportation is a key variable underlying the success of Colorado's
economy. Maintaining a balanced transportation system for moving raw materials
to manufacturers and finished products to consumers helps Colorado companies
compete favorably with companies elsewhere. Over time, failure to maintain and
improve the transportation system for moving freight could result in Colorado's
economy becoming less competitive with those in other states and nations.
Colorado's Freight Transportation System
HIGHWAYS
Much of Colorado's highway, rail, and pipeline freight travels the North-South
A National Highway System(NHS)map corridor of Interstate 25 and the East/West corridor of Interstate 70. State
(p. 87)has been included as supplemental Highways 160, 50, 40, 36, 34 and 1-76 are other important corridors for East and
information. West freight movements. State Highways 550, 385, 287, 285 and 71 are other
important North/South corridors. Most truck freight moves on the National
Highway System (see map on page 87), which accounts for about 32% o'
Colorado's total highway mileage.
TRUCKING
Among Colorado's leading truck freight-related businesses, in terms of
employment and shipments, are United Parcel Service, Federal Express,
Roadway Express, Consolidated Freightways, USF Reddaway, Werner
Enterprise, Westway Express, and Yellow Freight System. The package delivery
market is projected as an area of significant growth. Data are lacking in this area
due to exemptions in the reporting requirement for the US Department o'
Commerce's Commodity Flow Study. In the Denver area, mere than 25,000
trucks daily traverse the juncture of I-25 and 1-70 and more tan 19,000 daily
traverse the juncture of 1-25 and 1-225. Depending on location, truck volumes or'
interstate highways in the state range from approximately 1,600 to 21,000 daily
♦ ----4
86 Colorado Freight Report
COLORADO
NATIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM
tr
Y. .1 I L a.. .rq v .r.P'VCR 'WE"r . ev ./ ... . SCC;W, K• w
•1 ••. l C:�✓ •a 0Lroba II PA
s a
1 h>i K,::.-kt>Sicla
\ � J.
I. ..CAL; .. .._. ... - -. ti V*456..e: Io.a KRW:
.... ----..'"\\—N•Es.... i .....la «, I' •u Il • , ' I•••••••••-••••.-Ze.......s,a____„....4\sorjr..
.n. I 'r Ye. ...-i-__.._.....
7
.„•••I.
I T
I
E
11� f■'**� ^f , GiS,
"IC.. r- I SL 4YI. y 4_ R}H� .I...�.... _... j , .r.0 1 I
. ti
•
dm
b�. E.CLC Vs I 1.
w it U:.....
w I . .... aweit
`L .' } iaPK �_.`"_ —♦f :L_ ._'.... .. .. • .,r C.QSO. ......_.. - -.......�...: a
-y M r..i • I rn .ELC •
rrC> r N._ r... -', \ !rv. \_•._,, rrl," ! w I .-_.... .r r.. . .. •r L L .P. 0
• "`�.m I -rE ,i' :�� N_ �i, y 1 I•" • i ,� r � a ...
..r;
PIP
e:
YY `
�.r A. . ro. , _ P �R,,RLC . � Vr
w
� - Li BIC 7. •
•
} r.�z., n la. .. j�....S I. a •„ "M , �: 4 ..--e---"41
_. ... _ ....,rII•.5Cu � " r.rw ! i'r. PENT o°is., ! 1 �1��1. i
R J11•1 a.1. .L f,Fie .1,1W. g ...
I w. + J.. 1 • .�r>r r.:
I.. ' a.i9rl..:i Old
F. PIIr,r ,. J'J/�Y I ' Sl v._ ,:.RI••1 }i Cs:. _aE".
•
y ra _ . -! .. I i
I J'-� .... r iM _ _ Jç >T. I .IIrr. .. BS• "� I_ . ...I I
I
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
Rail
Two major Class One railroads and 11 regionalllocal/switching and terminal
railroads operate on 3,039 miles of rail line in Colorado. The Union Pacific (UP)
accounts for the most rail mileage, about 1,595 miles. Burlington Northam/Santa
Fe (BN/SF) operates on 952 miles of rail. Short-line railroads account for about
12% of total rail mileage.Among short line railroads,four operate on between 50
and less than 100 miles of rail. In Colorado, coal dominates all originating traffic
with 67% of the total. Other rail freight originating in Colorado includes food
products,farm products, nonmetallic minerals,and waste and scrap. Coal its also
the largest commodity that terminates its rail shipments in Colorado, at 56% of
the rail tonnage. Other incoming products include lumber and wood products,
nonmetallic minerals,farm products, and mixed freight.
PIPELINES
Amoco, Chase, Chevron, Conoco, Diamond Shamrock, Kaneb, Phillips, Sinclair
Wyco Pipeline Companies are the primary pipeline companies in Colorado
related to the petroleum products industry. The products in these pipelines flow
into Colorado from Medicine Bow and Cheyenne, Wyoming; Scott City, Kansas.
and Borger, Texas. Crude oil for Colorado's Conoco and Total refineries are
supplied through the pipelines as well as refined petroleum products, such as
gas, jet fuel and diesel. One pipeline goes from Denver to Fountain, Colorado
and another goes from the Conoco refinery to the Chase Aurora Tenminal that
supplies the Denver Intemational Airport. The main lines are six to ten inches in
diameter.
INTERMODALFACILITIES
LITI ES
The mergers of the Union Pacific with the Southern Pacific and the l3urlington
with the Santa Fe railroads left Colorado with only two intermodal railroad/truck
freight facilities, located at 53rd and Elati (UP) and at 40th and York Street
(BN/SF) in Denver. There are currently 69 licensed grain storage and loading
facilities served by both rail and highway in Colorado. Only three are located
west of the Continental Divide, one in Craig and two in the San Luis Valley.
AVIATION
Colorado's has 79 public-use airports that provide a variety of services. The
airline industry employs over 22,000 people in Colorado; most are involved with
air freight shipments to some degree. The air cargo industry is of increasing
interest to Commercial Service and General Aviation airports in the state. Air
cargo shipments at DIA alone accounted for 323,394 tons of freight movement in
1998. Air freight is typically a low weight and high value type shipment.
♦ ----♦
88 Colorado Freight Report
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.
According to the Colorado Aeronautics Division, the 79 public-use airports in the
state generate an annual economic activity impact of$14.3 billion.
OTHER FREIGHTGENERATORS
Colorado is primarily a tourist, communications, and agricultural economy,
therefore it is relatively dependent on the wholesale trade and distribution
associated with the freight side of the goods movements supporting these
industries. A large number of distribution facilities are located in Denver,
Colorado Springs, Pueblo and Grand Junction as well as elsewhere in the state.
The distribution centers and warehouses are mostly concentrated near major
highways such as 1-25, 1-70, 1-225 and 1-270.
The majority of Colorado's truck terminals are located in the Denver metropolitan
area. Much of the state's national and international air cargo moves through re-
load facilities in Denver, Grand Junction, Colorado Springs and Pueblo and is
shipped by truck to the major airports.
Colorado grows a variety of agricultural commodities and ranks in the top 10
states in production of all potatoes, sheep, sunflowers, cattle, edible dry beans,
onions, spinach, wheat, barley and cantaloupe. The freight industry is relied on to
deliver this almost $4.5 billion market from the farming communities to storage
facilities, processing plants, and customers.
CCOMMODITYMOVEMENTS
Data from the federal Commodity Flow Survey show that Illinois, Texas, and
Alabama are the leading destination states, in tonnage, for products shipped
from Colorado. Wyoming, Texas and Nebraska are the leading origins for
products shipped to Colorado. By value of the product, leading destination states
are California, Texas, and New York. Also by value, California, Texas, and
Wisconsin are the leading origins of product shipped to Colorado. In 1997, trucks
moved 64 % of the value and 76 % of the weight of shipments originating in
Colorado. About 38 % of commodities by value and 80 °/ by weight were
shipped less than 100 miles. Truck and rail freight tonnage will increase to 28%
by the year 2020.
Freight Needs Assessment
PERFOR MANCEINDI CATORS
Information about freight-related concerns and potential projects has been
obtained in several ways. Interviews with stakeholders such as shippers,
carriers, haulers, quasi-governmental, and other freight representatives were
conducted as part of the Freight Infrastructure Study. Based on these interviews,
♦
Colorado Freight Report 89
. The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
196 potential projects were identified. Additional information was collected for the
WTTN Study and the Colorado Statewide Rail Needs Study. In the spring of
2000, a Statewide Customer Telephone Survey was conducted that also
included two freight industry focus groups. The focus group participants
corroborated the findings of the freight industry derived from the FIS and the
Statewide Customer Telephone Survey. Congestion and road conditions topped
the list of concerns. A number of the concerns regarding the movement of height
by highway, rail, and air are addressed in the Plan.
Colorado Freight Industry Issues
U) N "O C U C > 75 O
T) C
¢ N u- J !- (n N C d N ''J Z
N O
C C d N y c l0 A ¢ C t' U1 1° y
¢ N O N N LYE t6 ¢ a C 0 O J >
Geographic r “ 2 3 2 g
<>a-3 of v n gig
Area a Q m • _ 5 a s p 3 2 E l m ¢
C m =2 2 -o O < w GE
.c t m m ¢ I .- ma-'a d a x
E o cal a 2m 'O a 5
`o
U _ _ c''. 0- d 'n V It
Front Range X _ XX _ XX X X X X
Eastern Plains X X X X X
Western Slope X X XX X XX X XX X
Highways/Trucks
Poor pavement condition was identified as a concern in the Freight Infrastructure
Study. Current state highway pavement condition is rated approximately 58%
excellent, good or fair in all categories of highways, with interstate at 60°/> (25%
There will be mom trucks in the less than the goal), NHS non-interstate at 66% (4% less than the goal), and other
years to come because of the highways at 61% (6% above the goal). The Transportation Commission
Internet. "E-commerce"is the increased funding to $135 million for surface treatment from $120 million in late
reality that faces the freight industry 1999. Based on increased traffic, including trucks, on the system, pavement
and everyone else that uses the conditions are expected to deteriorate slightly until 2005 before increased
transportation system. resources will begin to turn the trend around. Because of this increased
allocation, the concerns identified in the Freight Infrastructure Study should be
reduced over time.
The study identified 204 highway-related projects. The majority of these were for
highway widening, intersection improvements (signalization, geometry, widening,
etc.), and bypasses/new roadway construction. Interchange improvements,
resurfacing, railroad/highway grade separation, maintenance (ice and snow
removal, etc.), and bridge replacement/widening were also identified as needed
•
---�
90 Colorado Freight Report
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future♦
in many locations throughout Colorado. Also mentioned were noise barriers,
relocating railroad tracks, and an assortment of other projects. Approximately
31% of the identified projects were included in the Regional Transportation Plans
and are subsequently included in the 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan s
fiscally constrained or unfunded demand lists. That leaves over $2.6 billion in
additional projects identified by the freight community. Also, there are currently
$610 million in bridge replacement and rehabilitation projects identified
throughout Colorado. The FIS identified an additional $45.1 million for unmet
bridge (non-railroad/highway separation) replacement, rehabilitation, or new
construction.
The concerns of truckers are primarily safety or congested related. The major
metropolitan areas on the Front Range have a congestion problem that
negatively affects freight deliveries. Concerns in rural areas center less on
congestion and more on problems such as insufficient rest areas, inadequate
bridges, sharp curves, lack of shoulders, or pavement in poor condition. Signage
and bridge conditions were listed as other freight industry concerns.
According to N.S. Census Bureau statistics, some 47% of all ton miles traveled
on Colorado roads are through-state miles. That means that of the 14 billion ton-
miles traveled on Colorado roads in 1993, 6.5 billion impacted road conditions,
but did not contribute appreciable value to the state's economy, other than
through fuel and vehicle taxes.
COLORADO TRUCK TON-MILES
(000)
From To Within Through
Ton-miles 1,430 2,158 3,934 6,574
Source: U.S.Census Bureau,Commodity Flow Survey 1993
According to the USDOT Bureau of Statistics, 46.6% of all commodities
(measured by ton miles) carried on Colorado roads are moving through
the state.
With the estimated future increase of 41% (in truck Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
by 2020 on Colorado roads and a 28% increase in freight tonnage on Colorado
highways and railways by 2020, needs and associated impacts may increase
proportionately.
♦ ♦
Colorado Freight Report 91
♦The 2O2O Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future♦
TRUCK VEHICLE DAILY MILES TRAVELED
Urban
Interstate Freeway Other Principal Arterial Minor Arterial Collector Local
1995 1,065,802 353,200 428,263 59,858 3972 89
2020 1,520,874 518.238 593,504 92,715 7,070 97
Rural
1995 1,813,412 nla 1,064,674 566,491 135,515 5,869
2020 2,660,722 nla 1,421,177 746,103 188,779 7,985
Total 1995 5,497,145
Total Projected 2020 7,757,264
Projected X VMT Increase from 1995 to 2020 411.1%
Source:CDOT Division of Transportation Planning—FIS(Table B.1)
Rail
Decreasing access to freight rail service due to rail abandonments was identified
as a concern across the state. Since the completion of the 1979 State Rail Plan
310 route-miles of track have been abandoned in Colorado. The Leadville
Branch and the Templeton Gap Spur are currently pending or have recently
completed abandonment proceedings. Another potential abandonment includes
the Sage-Canon City (Tennessee Pass Line) rail line that provides services to
the central Eastlwest rail corridor.
One of the major concerns identified in the FIS and the Co orado State Rail
Needs Study is Colorado's 1,942 at-grade railroad crossings, not only because of
the safety issues but also for the delays to freight delivery and the traveling
public. The state has identified a total of 19 at-grade crossings exceeding an
"exposure factor" to vehicles of 75,000 vehicles per day. Seventeen of these are
in the Denver metropolitan area and two are in Grand Junction. The estimated
cost to build grade-separated crossings at these locations is$176 million. Where
crossings cannot be grade-separated or closed, resources should be targeted to
install, at a minimum,automated safety devices.
Other than at-grade rail crossings, improving tracks in poor condition and addmy
rail capacity are the most significant freight related projects for Colorado's rad
industry, according to the FIS. According to interviews conducted with railroad
companies, capacity problems in the North/South rail corridor parallel to I-2
between Denver and Colorado Springs continue to be an issue. An average or
53 trains per day operate in this rail corridor, part of which is single track. A 1994
analysis of this corridor identified improvements estimated at$57.6 million.
♦ ---4
92 Colorado Freight Report
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.
The WTTN study identified 17 deficiencies in Colorado rail corridors ranging from
single track/dual track operation to eliminating the creation of community
barriers.
COLORADO FREIGHT TONNAGE
(000)
(Truck and Rail)
Originating in Colorado Destined for Colorado Total
1993 232,891 205,170 438,061_
2020 269,867 291,122 560,989
Projected%Increase in Tonnage Shipped 1993 to 2020 28%
Source: U.S.Census Bureau,Commodity Flow Survey 1993
Note:Originating Tonnage includes data Colorado to Colorado Shipments
Note of Importance:Tonnage does not include freight going through the state.
IntermodaI Facilities
Issues at the state's several intermodal facilities have been identified. The UP
intermodal facility in Denver has a large unpaved parking area and provides only
limited parking for empty trucks. If the proposed "air-train" from Denver Union
Terminal to Denver International Airport becomes a reality, it would bisect this
facility and necessitate its relocation. If operations at this facility increase
significantly, there may also be a need for signalization at the access onto 40th
Avenue.
BN/SF also maintains an intermodal operation in Denver. The facility is in good
condition, however the access on 53rd Place is in need of maintenance.
Throughout the state additional air/truck, rail/truck transfer, inter-city bus, and
Amtrak terminals manage other freight movements.
Aviation
In 1997, Colorado's Aeronautics Division identified a number of improvements
that would directly or indirectly enhance air freight movements. These include:
developing commercial service at five airports; expanding air cargo aprons at
general aviation airports; making improvements to air cargo facilities; and,
developing a sixth parallel runway at DIA. CDOT's Aeronautics Division has
completed a Colorado Aviation Plan that includes policies and actions to address
various issues associated with Colorado's air transportation system. Individual
airports currently are updating airport master plans that identify various types of
improvements. For air cargo/freight facilities, this includes the cargo apron, cargo
building area, dock facilities, parking spaces, and cargo site area. Costs for these
projects and programs are not currently available.
p •
Colorado Freight Report 93
•The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future♦
Regulations, Policies and Issues
The Freight Infrastructure Study also solicited information from government
entities, economic development officials, and truck/rail shippers and providers in
each Transportation Planning Region (TPR) to determine their concerns
regarding freight-related policies and issues. The table below ists the concerns
expressed within the three major sub-regions of Colorado. The issues of concern
to most TPRs are the high taxes and registration fees required to operate trucks
in Colorado. Concerns over load limits, rail abandonments and reliable rail
service were also expressed by a number of TPRs. Companies that ship by trick
would like the allowable load limits to be increased during agricultural harvest
season in order to increase efficiency and speed up the critical farm-to-market
delivery time. Many shippers, particularly in the coal industry on the western
slope, prefer to ship via rail rather than truck due to the associated cost savings
However, rail car availability and service reliability often hirder this shipping
method. Many are concerned that rail lines in their area will be abardoned,
thereby precluding use of this vital shipping method. Other responses suggest
that the infrastructure is in poor condition and needs better routine maintenance.
_ Colorado Freight Industry Issues
N V N N 4
O
d y 2 2 a, N N ` O C
o v r- °� E c E i- 0 5 0 z
at m LL -- N u y o N D O ._
m TiK O c
'N o c yw ca N C m m ,- C > a 'v.
Geographic a 2 h 3 a m w ro a o o V w ) E
o N N o m .� m a o O 06 C- N u o
Area _ a A Q 2 c m 3 N 3 °S E 3° a
"� F m O is o o :t w 2 o[
m rn� C o
E rn rn m w cc 2 w 'a d a®
o io ± aoi N o m `o ce c a
O LL c 2 o- a rn N
Front Ranee X X X X X X X X X
Eastern Plains X X X X X•
Western Slope X X X X X X X X X X
• ---�
94 Colorado Freight Report
•The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
♦
THE 2020 TRANSPORTATION PLAN
This chapter discusses the integration of the regional plans with statewide
programs to produce the project component of the 2020 Statewide
Transportation Plan. This chapter also discusses the local roadway system in
terms of its importance Colorado's transportation system, and acknowledging
that a comprehensive statewide assessment of local roadway capital and
maintenance needs must still be pursued.
Developing Regional Transportation Plans
Each Regional Planning Commission (RPC) was asked to develop a regional
plan that identifies all modes of transportation, including roadway, public transit,
rail, aviation, intermodal, telecommunications, travel demand management
strategies,and bicycle and pedestrian projects which:
• Address mobility and accessibility requirements
• Support economic growth and development
• Protect the environment.
• Sustain the desired quality of life as defined in the values, vision and
goals.
The regional plans consider the role of each mode of transportation in providing 5 guiding themes for the
mobility to people, goods and services. Key elements of the regional plans regional and sfcfewide plans
include an emphasis on maintaining the integrity of the existing transportation
• Envision the future
system and encouraging alternatives to the single occupancy vehicle form of
travel. • Sustain Qualify of Life
• Create Balance
RPCs used the following criteria to select potential projects:
• Provide Accountability
• Does the project aid in the attainment of the goals developed by the • ecild Partnerships
RPC?
• Does the project represent a justifiable need?
• Does the project contribute to an integrated system that meets the
RPCs'needs?
• Does the project seem to be realistic based on environmental and
physical constraints?
Affirmative answers to these types of questions more than likely would enable a
project to become part of a regional plan.
♦ ♦
Developing the 2020 Transportation Plan 95
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
♦
The regional transportation planning process in the metropolitan areas vary frorn
what is described above due to specific federal requirements applicable to the
Metropolitan Planning Organizations(MPOs) as described in the Introduction.
Statewide Programs and Transportation
Commission Priorities
The Transportation Commission identified a number of specific statewide
programs to be integrated with regional projects as part of the 2020
Statewide Transportation Plan. These statewide programs include:
• CDOT Strategic Transportation Investment Program (7" Pot) - 28 long-
term high-priority transportation corridors identified by the CDOT
Transportation Commission to receive accelerated funding. See Map on
page 113.
• 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 were the surface treatment funding
should be used in meeting the Transportation Commissions goals The
Transportation Commission has set an objective of having the 60% of the
entire 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 were 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 Commissions 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 Noise Barrier Program — The CDOT noise Daffier program
identified Type II noise barriers.A Type II noise barrier is a barrier placed
along an existing highway facility to address significant noise impact from
traffic. The CDOT Transportation Commission has determined that the
program will sunset in Fiscal Year 2002.
• CDOT Small Urban Program — Federal Aid Urban System (FAUS)
funding was eliminated with the passage of the Intermodal Surface
♦ ---�
96 Developing the 2020 Transportation Plan
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Futures
Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991. The CDOT Transportation
Commission created the Small Urban program to allow Small Urban
Areas time to transition from the FAUS program and to honor their
Transportation Improvement Program commitments. The Small Urban
Program is scheduled to sunset in 2004. (See discussion on page 28).
• 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 programs
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.
• CDOT Operations —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 the
Intermodal Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 and continuing with the
Transportation Efficiency Act for the 21st Century, 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.
Local Roadways
LOCAL STREET AND ROADWAY DESCRIPTION
Local Roadways(pp.97-iO2)has teen
The System revised from the 7-`i-21X)0 draft by
expanding the discussion of the lac.I
The municipal and county streets and roads are a vital component of the state's system and revenue sources.and int hiding
public roadway network. In addition to providing mobility for all citizens on a daily examples of local roadway assessments by
basis, local streets and roads provide seamless access to and from markets and various municipalities and counties
play a key role in the state's tourism industry.
•
Developing the 2020 Transportation Plan 97
•The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future♦
The local roadway system represents nearly 86% or 71,107 miles of the state's
80,253 centerline miles of public roadway that are eligible for state Highway
Users Tax Fund (HUTF) revenues. Over the past decade, the system has grown
by over 2,600 centerline miles,from 68,504 miles in 1990 to its current size
On average, 290 centerline miles of streets and roads are added to the local
system each year. The majority of growth in system mileage has occurred in
municipalities where centerline miles have increased by nearly 17% in the last 9
years. In contrast, county roadway growth over the same perod increased by
1.5%.
At present, about 35% of the state's Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT) are on the
local roadway system (see table, page 78). The local roadway system share of
statewide VMT has remained stable at this level over the past decade.
The local bridge system of over 4,500 bridges (includes only those in excess of
20-feet in length)constitutes about 55%of the state's bridge sys':em.
Locally Defined Needs
The most recent CDOT effort to determine local system needs was included in
the Colorado's 20-Year Transportation Plan adopted January 1996. The
analysis covered a 12-year period from 1988-2001. Specifically, it reflected
system-wide improvements to surface condition, maintenance and operations
bridge, and additional roadways for both "high"and"medium"growth scenarios
The "medium" scenario identified $14.06 billion in needs and $5.18 billion in
revenue reflecting a shortfall of $8.88 billion. The "high" scenario identified
$17.74 billion in need and$5.18 in revenue reflecting a shortfall of$12.56 billion.
Assessment Process
Because of the lack of both a compatible database and a mutually agreed upon
methodology for determining local roadway needs, a comprehensive assessment
of Colorado's 63 counties and 270 municipalities continues to be an elusive goal.
It is evident, however, that in a number of areas where there have beer
comprehensive efforts to quantify local roadway needs (often it response to tie
citizens' demands to better address growing maintenance and mobility
transportation problems), the number of unfunded roadway improvements
identified are significant.
Recently collected data on unfunded roadway improvements put together by the
Colorado Municipal League and Colorado Counties Inc. reflects on their
concerns. A brief description of some of the findings follows.
• Elbert County The county needs to replace 22 temporary bridges that
were built following a flood in 1965. They are estimated to cost $22.6
million. With about $4 million available annually, of which about 30% is
4 ----1
98 Developing the 2020 Transportation Plan
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future,
•
allocated to construction-preservation activities, it would take
approximately 12 years to replace these bridges.
• La Plata County - The county has identified $263 million in
reconstruction projects, safety enhancements, and efficiency
enhancements. Given the county's current funding level for road and
bridge special projects of$2.5 million per year, only$50 million of these
projects can be completed over the next 20 years.
• Larimer County- The 1998 Latimer County Transportation Plan
identified $100 million in existing construction deficiencies on the county
road system and an additional $100 million over the next 20 years.
Based on the current level of funding for construction of about$2 million
annually, it could take 100 years to make the improvements.
• Pitkin County- A recent Pavement Management Study recommended
the expenditure of$2.1 million annually to improve the pavement integrity
of the existing county road system. Given other county transportation
priorities, there is only $1.4 million available annually to maintain the
existing roadway system, leaving a shortfall of$14 million over the next
20 years,
• Fort Collins- The city has identified $324 million in capital projects
through 2015 and only $43 million in funding. In addition, annual
shortfalls of $3.8 million for maintenance and operations and $6 million
for transit were identified.
• Loveland- The city's 2020 Transportation Plan indicates only half the
needed $250 million for capital projects would be available. In addition,
the maintenance and operations budget is underfunded by $700,000
annually.
• Grand Junction- The city has identified $35 million of unfunded
overlays and other capital transportation requirements over the next 15
years, and is funding only $1-$1.5 million of the $25 million per year
recommended by the pavement management program.
• Pagosa SpringtArchuleta County- A 1998 Road Assessment Study
identified $66 million in capital improvements to accommodate traffic
through 2017 and identified only $1.5 million annually in county and
municipal sales tax revenues to address those improvements.
• SteamboatSprings- The city has documented an estimated $3-$10
million shortfall for street widening, bridge replacement, intersection
improvements.
A ♦
Developing the 2020 Transportation Plan 99
. The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
• Lake City - The City has identified $2.2 million in unfunded
improvements to pave gravel roads and to provide adequate storm
drainage to protect the new investment.
• Pueblo-The city has identified the need for about$9 million to resurface
local streets that are in poor condition plus $2 million per year for
resurfacing to maintain the streets that are in fair condition but can only
provide$1.3 million annually for these maintenance activities.
• DRCOG - The DRCOG fiscally constrained 2020 Regional
Transportation Plan identified $1.5 billion in local roadway projects in the
Denver Metropolitan Area. The Metro Vision phase of the planning
process estimated an additional $13.4 billion in local roadway needs
including such activities as constructing new roads, widening of eristirg
roads, paving gravel roads, reconstruction, maintenance and operations,
and off-system bridges.
This list of unfunded transportation improvements,from only a sampling of the 63
counties and 270 municipalities, underscores the level of unfunded demand on
the municipal and county street and road systems. Despite the increased
financial efforts of local taxpayers to support these locally defined improvements
(as discussed in more detail below), there remain significant immediate and
future unfunded roadway projects and related improvements.
Local Revenue
In 1998, CDOT, municipal and county governments had combined revenues of
about$1.7 billion for transportation improvements to the state and local roadway
system. In that year, local govemments' share of $857.1 million represented
slightly over half of the total revenue directed toward highway, street, and road
projects and maintenance activities throughout the state.
Local revenues spent on county roads and municipal streets are generated from
local, state,federal and private sources(see the following table).
• ---1
100 Developing the 2020 Transportation Plan
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.
BREAKDOWN OF LOCAL REVENUE
1998
(Dollars In Millions)
Source 1998 % of Total
Local 578.7 68%
State 241.7 28%
Federal 12.3 1%
Private 24.4 3%
TOTAL 857.1 100%
SOURCE.'B8 Annual Statement of Receipts and Expenditures for Roads,Bridges,and Streets-CitylCnty Rpt.
The 68% of locally generated revenues are from sources such as local sales
taxes, property taxes, and general fund appropriations as contrasted to the 28%
comprised of user fees such as motor fuel taxes and vehicle registration fees.
Federal and private sources account for approximately 4%of local revenues.
Local governments have attempted to keep pace with ever-increasing demand
for local roadway needs as demonstrated on the following table. Local
government revenue allocated to transportation purposes has increased by 68%
since 1990;from $510.3 million annually to$857.1 million annually in 1998.
LOCAL REVENUE
GROWTH BY SOURCE
1990 - 1998
(Dollars In Mom
Source 1990 1995 1998 %Growth
Local 348.2 417.0 578.7 66.2%
State 152.6 196.6 241,7 58.4%
Federal 9.5 10.9 12.3 29.5%
Private 0 17.0 24.4 -
TOTAL 510.3 641.5 857.1 68%Growth
SOURCE9019S/98 Annual Statement of Receipts and Expenditures for Roads,Bridges,and St:CitylCnty Rpt
Locally generated revenue has been the fastest growing source available for
local roadways. Between 1990 and 1998, the locally generated sources grew by
66%. Local taxpayers contribute about $2 of revenues for every $1 of state-
shared user fees received.
Developing the 2020 Transportation Plan 101
• The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
In addition to local governments providing the majority of funding for local roads.
the 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan indicates that the vast majority of the
state's public transit operating revenues also comes from local sources. These
transit revenues are not included in the tables on page 101. For both the state s
urbanized areas (Denver, Colorado Springs, Fort Collins, Grand Junction,
Greeley and Pueblo) and the operators that serve the mountain resort
communities, approximately 75% of their operating revenues are derived from
local government sources. The state's rural and specialized services (i.e ,
demand responsive service aimed at elderly persons with disabilities) receive
about 25% of their annual operating revenues from local sources. The 1991
Transit Benefit and Needs Study identified about $190 million annually (1996
dollars) in locally derived revenue going to support transit operating costs in the
state.
Fiscal Challenge
Despite ever-increasing demands on strained financial resources, local
governments are expected to not only maintain the existing system but increase
capacity on local roadways. A recent survey by the Colorado Municipal League
of its member governments found that coping with growth and street
improvement needs ranked 2nd and 3rd, respectively, as their top financial
concerns. (See chart below). With Colorado's population expected Ito grow by
40%,from 4.3 million to nearly 6 million by 2020, meeting these demands will not
get easier.
Major Fiscal Problems
Municipalities Face in 2000
e5%
79% 75% 75%
70% 71% 72%
55% •N 4l
x {
3�IY�R p.t
i £ "a
Coping with Growth Street Improvement Needs
Is Eastern I Southen ❑Front Rangi IN Western Slops IN All
SOURCEC:dorado Municipal League
•
102 Developing the 2020 Transportation Plan
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
♦
TRANSPORTATION FINANCING
TOTALTRANSPORTATIONREVENUE
CDOT prepares revenue projections periodically as part of its resource allocation
and budgeting process. Revenue projections are made for both 20 and six-year
planning periods for purposes of developing the statewide and regional long-
range transportation plans, the Metropolitan Planning Organizations
Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs), and the Statewide Transportation
Improvement Program (STIP). For purposes of developing the MPO long range
transportation plans,the MPOs and the state cooperatively develop estimates of
funds that will be available to support plan implementation.
REVENUE SOURCES
Federal
The 1998 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), is the federal
legislation that directs how much and for what purposes each state can spend
federal transportation dollars. The main sources of funding at the federal level
include the various modal trust funds and accounts that distribute funds back to
the states by formula or at the discretion of Congress. Federal revenues that flow
into these funds come predominately from the federal tax levied on motor fuel
and various other transportation taxes and fees. Federal transportation funds
currently account for about 35%of the total funds available to CDOT.
State
All revenue collected at the state level for transportation and transportation
related purposes is initially deposited into the Highway Users Tax Fund (HUTF).
Traditional revenue sources include taxes collected on motor fuel purchased
within the state and various taxes and fees associated with transportation (e.g.,
motor vehicle registrations and other fees). A recent additional source of revenue
for transportation has come from legislation that has directed some state general
fund surplus to transportation. State generated funds currently account for about
65% of the total funds available to CDOT.
Besides using the more traditional sources of revenue and mechanisms to
advance projects, CDOT has also taken advantage of other financing options to
accelerate project construction.
• Recent federal legislation allows for the creation of State Infrastructure
Banks (SIB). The SIBs are capitalized with federal transportation funds
• ♦
Transportation Financing 103
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
Transportation Financing has been — that are then lent to local governments for transportation projects that
revised from the 7-5-2000 draft to include benefit the state's transportation system.
historical trend information on the state's . Passage of the recent Transportation Revenue Anticipation Notes
transportation revenues(pp. 104-105). _ (TRANs) statewide transportation ballot issue provides ft.nding for critical
state highway projects based on the sale of anticipation notes backed by
federal funds earmarked to the state. The proceeds from these notes will
accelerate construction projects that would take many years longer to
complete if they were funded on a "pay-as-you-go" basis. Because the
rate of the bonds is lower than the current annual cost increases of the
projects, it is anticipated that actual cost savings can be expected
The following table provides an historical perspective of CDOT's revenues from
Fiscal Year(FY) 1990 to FY' 1998 to illustrate several trends. The dollars in this
table are presented in millions.
Source FY90 FY95 FY98 Percent Change
FY90-98
State HUTF $233.1 $289.7 $362.6 56%
Sales&Use Tax $ 0.00 $ 0.0 $153.1 N/A
Federal Funds $224.0 $211.4 $268.2 20%
Miscellaneous $52.9 $ 45.7 $ 50.8 -4%
Total $500.0 $546.8 $834.7 67%
Source: CDOT's Office of Financial Management and Budget
Overall,CDOT's revenues have increased by 67% between FY90 and FY98. In
FY90, Federal funds accounted for a larger share (45%) of CDOT's total
revenues than in FY98, at which time the share of federal funds decreased to
32%of CDOT's total revenues.
Looking at FY98 revenues by source, as illustrated in the table on the following
page, the majority of the funds are being generated from state sources, such as
the user-fee based HUTF (44%) and sales and use taxes(18%). The dollars are
presented in millions.
•
104 Transportation Financing
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Futures
Revenue Source FY98 %of Total
State HUTF $362.6 44%
Sales&Use Tax $153.1 18%
Federal Funds $268.2 32 %
Miscellaneous $ 50.8 6
Total $834.7 100%
Based on the most recent revenue projections, over the next 20 years,
approximately $30.4 billion (2000 Dollars) are expected to be available from
federal, state, local and private sources. These revenues will be used to address Over the next 20 years, $30.4 Billion
the $63.9 billion in projects identified in the Fiscally Constrained element and the (2000 Dollars)will be available from
Unfunded and Unprioritized Requests component of the 2020 Statewide federal, slate, local and private sources
Transportation Plan. This does not include revenues local governments receive this does not include revenues local
for maintenance and improvements on their local roads. The revenue projection governments receive for maintenance arc
improvements on their local roads
includes $2.1 billion of sales and use taxes above the revenue projections used
in the August and November 1999 resource allocation. Projected transportation
revenues are summarized in the table on page 104. These revenues will be used
to address the fiscally constrained element of the 2020 Statewide Transportation
Plan. (See page 109).
Approximately $17.6 billion (2000 dollars) of the $30.4 billion (2000 dollars) in
expected funds will flow directly to the CDOT from federal and state sources to
build, reconstruct and maintain the 9,100 mile state highway system. In addition,
over$1.4 billion (2000 dollars)will come from local governments to match federal
funds and improve roads in major metropolitan areas. Also, $11.5 billion (2000
dollars) in local and federal transit funds will be used by transit providers to
maintain and expand public transportation systems throughout the State.
4 •
Transportation Financing 105
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
• ♦
Total 20-year Transportation Revenue
Total 20 Year Transportation Revenue
(March 2000 Projections)
$30.4 B (Year 2000 Dollars)
Locally Funded
Federal Highway Projects
Local Match Funds
Funds $915,000 Transit Funds
$4,980,949 $470,223
$11,536,1C4
State Sales&Use
Tax
$4,590,901 State Funds
$7,907,899
RE VENUE DISTRIBUTION
CDOT does not receive all the state funds deposited into the HUTF for use on
the state highway system. By law, other state agencies and the cities and
counties receive a share of the funds for transportation related activities.
▪ The diversion of funds to other state agencies from the HUTF ;s
commonly called "off-the-top" funding. Agencies and activities that
State funds cannot be used to receive funding include the Colorado State Patrol, the Department of
construct non-highway projects or Revenue's Ports of Entry Division and the State Capital Construction
fo match non-highway federal Fund. While there has been a sharp reduction in funds going to "off-the-
funds top" agencies since 1996, in Fiscal Year 1999-2000 about 10% of the
HUTF or$67.2 million is allocated to "off-the-top"agencies.
• Two distinct funding formulas guide the distribution of funds to the cities
and counties. The first 7-cents of the 22-cents gasoline fuel tax and
various fees enacted before 1969 are distributed 26% to counties and
9% to cities. Subsequent increases in motor fuel taxes and fees we
distributed 22%to counties and 18%to cities.
The remaining funds are deposited into the State Highway Account for projects
on the state highway system.
• ---�
106 Transportation Financing
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.
•
FUN DING LIMITATIONS
The CDOT share of the HUTF that goes into the State Highway Account is
bound by the Colorado Constitution to be spent solely on highway-related
activities. State funds cannot be used to construct non-highway projects or to
match non-highway federal funds.
The sales and use revenues received by the Department are restricted to the
Strategic Projects.
While Colorado does have a dedicated state aviation fuel tax the state is one of
a few that does not have a dedicated state revenue source for public
transportation. Public transportation has traditionally been funded at the local
level. However, both aviation and public transportation projects are eligible for
grants from the Federal Aviation Administration and the Federal Transit Colorado has yet to establish a
Administration, respectively. The interchangeability of federal transportation dedicated state revenue source for
funds is now permissible under federal law. TEA-21 and its precursor, the public transportation
Intermodal Surface Transportation and Efficiency Act of 1991 allowed for the
"flexible" use of a portion of each state's highway fund for transit related
purposes and also for permitting a state to use its transit funds for highway
construction.
The State Transportation Commission has used this "flexible" provision only
occasionally because of the overwhelming demands placed on CDOT to
maintain the structural integrity of the existing highway system and to build
additional highway capacity. Over the past three years, more than $28 million
has been "flexed" from various federal transportation programs for public transit
projects. In all cases, local entities have matched the federal dollars. Nearly$19
million has been allocated to the Southwest Corridor Light Rail Project in metro
Denver, wil:h the remainder going to capital acquisition for transit service
throughout the state.
INTERNALDISTRIBUTION OFCDOT FtVENUE
The current distribution of funds within CDOT is primarily directed to activities
that enhance and maintain the 9,100 miles of state highway. Funding for these
transportation activities is reflected in the following three program categories.
• Statewide Programs (Transportation Commission Prioritieijigh
priority activities identified by the Transportation Commission include the
Surface Treatment Program, the Bridge Program, the Rest Area
Program, the Noise Barrier Program, the Safety Program, the
Maintenance Program, the Intelligent Transportation System Program,
and the CDOT Operations Program. The Noise Barrier and Rest Area
Programs are scheduled to"sunset" after 2002 and 2004, respectively.
q •
Transportation Financing 107
. The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
• Strategic Projects ("4Pot")- 28 high-priority statewide transportation
projects identified by the Transportation Commission for accelerated
funding.
▪ Regional Programs- Includes the Other Regional Priorities Program,
the Congestion Management and Air Quality ImprDvement Program
(CMAQ), the Metropolitan Surface Transportation and Nletropo,itan
Planning Programs, and the Enhancement Program.
CDOT Resource Allocations
CDOT employs its Resource Allocation Model to decide funding levels for each
of the three programs. Allocations to the Strategic Projects and Statewide
Programs are partially based on performance measure information. Of the funds
allocated to Regional Programs, about 65% are distributed to the 6 CDOT
Regions for construction activities based on a formula that reflects 45% vehicle
miles of travel, 40% lane miles, and 15% truck traffic. The remaining funds in the
Regional Programs category are distributed statewide by formulas that reflect the
unique characteristic of each individual program.
CDOT Resource Allocations-2001 -2020
$17.6 B
(Year 2000 Dollars)
Based on March 2000 Revenue Projections
Regional
Statewide --Programs
Programs 18%
49.5%
Strategic
—Protects
525%
• -----•
108 Transportation Financing
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
♦
FISCALLY CONSTRAINED PLAN Fiscally Constrained Plan (pp_ 10(-1 13)
has been revised from the 7-5-2000 .o
reflect Transportation Commission'
Developing the fiscally constrained element required collaboration at the state, October 19. 2000 decisions_
regional, and local levels, reflecting TEA-21's intended approach for
transportation planning. Limited resources compared to the magnitude of
projects requires collaboration in order to make the hard choices about which
projects may be funded.
Of the 2020 Plan's $64 billion project and program total, half ($32 billion)
comprises the fiscally constrained portion and the remaining half comprises the
unfunded projects and programs described in the next chapter. Total revenues
expected to be available total $30.4 billion. Both figures are presented in year
2000 dollars, recognizing the impact of inflation since construction of these
projects will occur at different times throughout the 20 year period. The $1.6
billion difference between projects and revenues resulted from the early
completion of the Denver, Colorado Springs, and North Front Range MPOs'
2020 Plans utilizing the Commission's January 1998 2020 revenue projection
and resource allocation program. The Denver, Colorado Springs and North Front
Range metropolitan areas began updating their long-range plans to 20"25
beginning Summer/Fall 2000. CDOT will be providing 2025 revenue projections
and allocations by CDOT Region for use by these MPOs to develop their fiscally
constrained 2025 Plans. The $1.6 billion variance will be resolved through this
2025 plan update process.
The Plan's fiscally constrained appendix of projects and programs is available as
a separate document referenced as Appendix E.
The Transportation Commission's resource allocation decisions made in August
and November 1999 prioritized over 80% of the $17.6 billion of projected
revenues under their authority. Utilizing information from several management
systems and program-level plans, the Commission identified their expectations
for the following statewide programs:
STRATEGICPROJECTS
• The Commission's objective is to accelerate the completion of these 28
projects by committing $75 million per year of Department revenues.
Approval by voters in November 1999 of the TRANs initiative provides
an effective tool to accelerate the program. The Transportation
Commission has not yet prioritized the $1.4 billion in sales and use tax,
based on the March 2000 revenue projections from Office of State
Planning and Budgeting.
4 ♦
Statewide Transportation Improvement Program 109
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plon: Investing in Colorado's Future
TRANSPORTATI ONCOM MISSI ON PRI ORITI ES
• Surface Treatment Program—The Commission's objective is for a:least
60% of the state highway system to have a pavement condition rating of
"good" or "fair". Based on management system projections, the
Commission's allocation of$135.0 million per year of which $20.5 million
is coming from the maintenance pool. will fall short of their objective.
• Maintenance Program — The Commission's objective for activities
performed by the Department's maintenance forces is to achieve a level
of service "grade" of B+, committing $3 billion over :he 20 years to
achieve and maintain this objective
• Bridge Program — The Commission's objective is to reduce the number
of deficient bridges, and is committing $25 million per year for the state
system bridges and an additional $7 million per year for local bridges.
Some Maintenance Program dollars are also used for preventative
maintenance on state system bridges. Operations — The Commission
recognized the need for funding Department-wide administrative and
other functions necessary for delivering its construction and maintenance
programs, allocating $1.65 billion over the 20 year period. This figure
includes aeronautics, safety education, transit, and several special
allocations such as gaming funds.
• ITS Program — The Commission allocated $5 million per year (2001
through 2003) for capital improvements identified in the ITS Business
Plan; an additional $6 million in 2004 for the construction of the traffic
operations center, and $3 million per year (2004 through 2020) for
maintenance of the ITS infrastructure.
• Rest Areas - The Commission allocated $14 million (2001 - 2004) to
complete capital improvements identified in the Rest Area Plan.
• Noise Barrier Program — The Commission allocated $4.9 million to
continue the Type II Noise Barrier construction program only through
2002.
SAFETY
• Safety Programs - The Commission examined two specific programs
within Safety: (1) roadway striping - the Commission allocated $344
million over the 20 years; and, (2) sign replacement, the Commission
allocated $212 million over the 20 years. An additional $335 million over
the 20 years was set aside for programs to be identified n the
Department's Safety Plan.
♦ --__
10 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future• .
REGIONALPROGRAMS
Subsequent to these allocation decisions, the remaining $3.2 billion was
available for regional priorities, including Transportation Enhancement and
Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) programs. The Regional Planning
Commissions utilized a broad set of criteria for prioritizing their projects,
including:
• Public Support
• Congestion Relief
• Safety
• Environmental Factors
• System Continuity
• Economic Impact
• Intermodal and Multi-modal Factors
• Ability to Implement
• Preservation of the Transportation System
The majority of projects receiving a high priority for the regional funds are
highway-related projects. However, other modal projects, with funding identified
primarily from non-CDOT revenues, were identified and prioritized through the
regional planning process.
Transit capital and operating programs to continue existing service were a high
priority for the transportation planning regions. The fiscally constrained element
of the 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan includes $11.5 billion for transit,
primarily funded through local sources.
In addition, a number of projects to be funded through local or private revenue
sources, were prioritized and included in the fiscally constrained plan. These
projects total$1.4 billion.
Each of these components comprise the fiscally constrained plan totaling $32.0
billion, as illustrated in the following table.
A •
Statewide Transportation Improvement Program 111
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
Strategic Projects $5.7
Transportation Commission Priorities $8.7
Regional Programs $4.7
Transit $11.5
Local/Private $ 1.4
TOTAL $32.0
The Fiscally Constrained Plan can also be represented in terms of CDC T's 5
investment categories:
• Safety-Programs that reduce fatalities, injuries and property damage
• System Quality Programs that maintain existing infrastructure
• Mobility-Programs that provide for the movement of people and goods.
• Strategic Projects 28 high priority statewide projects.
• Program Delivery- Support functions that enable the delivery of the
program categories listed above.
A graphic representation of the Fiscally Constrained Plan by investment category
is presented below.
2020 Fiscally Constrained Plan
2020 Fiscally Constrained Plan
$32 Billion
(Year 2000 Dollars) Safety
System Quality 6.7%
52.8%
DAobility
23A%
J
Strategic Proje s Program Delwery
16.6% 0,3%
112 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program
I
i fiscally Constrained I
,L Is , -' 2001-2020 Statewide Plan I
I I i I Project Locations
t� Z 7 J I Gi
l— Project Types:
't
I tai 1 c 4 4 -._....__ _r_i_ _ ,_ - -
jJ J 1...Y, •-.r ,..-----5 • tE: .r- ' 1 ,- ' System Quality
! ) Tr'. _____i!ij.--- q5• •—., •
Ji _._ . L_.. , 1 ti I I Mobility I
4 r Ii — ,. .�1 ..— Proa,am Del,.rrrI nit- i
S I - — .A_....,� - I.r_.=
I
z-4_— — _ —. _ j 1 $ I ` sr S I .. T'"
I Strategic Projects
II'— 75` "! rtgie.,E1 , , 1 gin 1
— — — ��.. M. .. ( �� CDO1 legion
--� eoonearies 1 11� _ G I I Fit
4` / ^ Val. �., „ t?„ -` i. — —
r , s a r I
' , n .-.
____ + 25 J i m DRAFT
I
I
I I I
�r .,jam,,`,..,.,,,.; �.,� �� J 1 D I- _ - --I I C•I — _ — - — l C —_ 1 —._.._—� � I I I— i i
- 0 I t
u, '$` .,-- I r Note:
r
ui `•� '1 .,-- I Not all projects are shown I
L ��, 1.4 i;.,I I on this map. Please reler
— �. ; to the Project lists for r
1 1.—..__ -t . ,..'^ I r complete information. i
5_ l I I -- -' - ,
iI" - - r,�,l •t f J. i j t
rim i
_J I
I / r----f-\-I--'--'P-/ „ ,
K,: t
I _ ..w.. , I
I •. •. March 2s. 2005
♦4IWr.uo veyeiirEen; ur r4,P011/1100
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plon: Investing in Colorado's Future•
Unfunded Projects and Programs(pp.
114-117)has been added since the 7-5- UNFUNDED PROJECTS AND
2000 draft to better describe the$32 billion
unfunded projects and programs. Appendix PROGRAMS
G has been created to provide the documen- PROGRAMS
tation for this new chapter.
As described in the previous chapter, $32 billion of the Plan's $64 billion total
projects and programs comprise the fiscally constrained element and the
remaining $32 billion comprise the unfunded projects and programs which were
identified primarily through the regional transportation planning process. These
projects and programs are identified in a separate documert referenced as
Appendix F. As the regional plan update process concluded nearly one year
ago, several amendments are under consideration which could increase this $32
billion of unfunded projects and programs by at least an additional$4 billion
To better understand what comprises the $32 billion of unfunded projects and
programs identified in the 20-Year Statewide Transportation Plan, investments
have been sorted in the following manner:
• by Investment Category—System Quality, Safety, Mobility, and Program
Delivery;
• by Mode;
• by Strategic Corridor(corridors which contain the 28 projects comprising
the Transportation Commission's Strategic Project Program); and,
• by Projects and Programs estimated to cost$50 million or more.
The specific projects and programs comprising each of the following graphics
have been compiled into Appendix G.
• ----1
114 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future*
•
Investment Category
This chart sorts projects by the Departments investment categories.
System Quality
$6.0Ø._[
O Mobility
Safety •Proery
3..D8 ■Sa■System Quality
Program
Delivery
60.0038 Mobility
623.0e
Seventy-two percent of the unfunded project and programs fall in the mobility
investment category; whereas the majority(53%)of the projects and programs in
the fiscally constrained element are in the system quality investment category
Modes
This chart sorts projects and programs by mode. Highway projects and
programs comprise 45% of the unfunded projects and programs followed by rail
and transit. Certain categories of funds can only be used for specific modes.
Highway projects and programs are eligible for both federal and state sources of
funding. Several projects are likely to be funded through private consortiums.
Mass transit projects are eligible for federal funding programs (including flexible
provisions of some federal highway funds); the flexible portion of the sales and
use taxes available from the state, and the funds dedicated by local governments
(including special districts like the Regional Transportation District in the Denver
metropolitan area). There is no dedicated source of state funds for transit.
Aviation projects are eligible for federal and state aviation trust fund revenues.
Rail projects have extremely limited funding available from federal and state
(State Rail Bank) sources. Bicycle and pedestrian projects are eligible for
federal, state and local sources of revenues.
♦
Statewide Transportation Improvement Program 115
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
♦
Bicycle/Pod
$1.0
Transi•' 13.5B
Highways
$5.88 In----
Highways
■Private Highway'
le Rail
O Aviation
•441k O BlkelPedestrian
Aviation
/et" \
$0.28 Private
Rai Highways
$10.5 $1.08
Strategic Corridors
The chart below depicts unfunded projects and programs within corridors which
contain the 28 Strategic Projects of the Transportation Commission's Strategic
Project Program. These unfunded projects and programs are not part of the
Strategic Project program but represent additional requested improvements
within the corridors beyond the funded Strategic Project Program.
$9.7B
F.Jes:tP,.
■Unfunded
Projects/Programs in
Strategic Corridors
1
O Remainder of Unfunded
. ` .3r Projects/Programs
$22.38
♦ ----♦
116 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.
F'roject/Programs Greater than $50 Million
There are 2,065 discrete projects and programs comprising the Unfunded
Demand portion of the 20-Year Statewide Transportation Plan. Each of the
discrete projects range in estimated cost from $4 thousand to as much as $8.8
billion. Unfunded programs range from $69.3 million to $2.4 billion.
2003 ProJuts
a Programs
$6.0B
Unfunded Demand (>$50M
Each)
■Remainder of Unfunded
Demand (<$50M Each)
ap
z
4Bects
14 Programs � kc! 2'
B
Consequently, it is helpful to illustrate what portion of the$32 billion is comprised
of "big ticket" projects and programs. Sixty-two projects and programs have an
unfunded demand of more than$50 million, and account for over 80% of the total
unfunded amount. Of these 62 unfunded projects and programs, 48 are projects
(e.g., U.S. 50 capacity improvements east of Pueblo) versus 14 that are
programs(e.g., roadway operational and maintenance programs).
2020 STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
(in billions)
FISCALLY CONSTRAINED $32.0
UNFUNDED $32.0
TOTAL $64.0
♦ •
Statewide Transportation Improvement Program 117
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan will be implemented by programming
priority projects into the six-year document called the Statewide Transportation
Improvement Program (STIP). The STIP is required under the federal
transportation planning requirements of TEA-21 and is a staged, multi-year,
statewide intermodal program of transportation projects that is consistent wit the
statewide transportation plan.
The STIP must, by federal regulation, be fiscally constrained. Consequently only
projects identified in the fiscally constrained portion of 2020 plan are eligible to
be included in the STIP. In the non-attainment areas of the state, conformity
must be determined for projects and programs included in the five Metropolitan
Planning Organizations' (MPO) Transportation Improvement Frograms (TIPS)
and the STIP.
At the statewide plan level, revenues from all sources are pooled and allocated
An electronic database has been to programs such as the Strategic Projects, Commission Prior ties, and Other
recently implemented at COOL that Regional Priorities. The statewide plan does not identify how much Interstate
links projects in the SUP directly to the Maintenance, National Highway System, etc. funds are allocated to any one
sate transportation plan source project or program. In this way, it facilitates selecting the highest priority projects
based on their merit rather than selecting among projects eligible for the specific
category of funding.
The second aspect of fiscal constraint works around the "highest use" cor cep
When priority projects are programmed from the statewide plan into the STIF',
the funds associated with the Interstate system are applied first .ntil they are all
programmed. Then the next highest system funds are used (e.g., National
Highway System), and so forth. This assures CDOT effectively utilizes all its
resources to fund its priorities.
The first year of the STIP comprises CDOT's budget. An electronic database has
been recently implemented at CDOT that links projects in the STIP directly to the
state transportation plan source. This linkage ensures consistency between the
long-range plan and the STIP, as well as provides tracking and accountability
through the life of the project,from planning to implementation.
The STIP is updated on a two-year cycle through the Project Plority
Programming Process (4P). The 4P incorporates the state statutory requirement
that CDOT have a formal hearing process for the boards of county
commissioners. It also meets the federal requirement that CDOT work
•
118 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future♦
cooperatively with the MPOs to develop metro area TIPs prior to incorporating
them into the STIF'. The 4P also provides the mechanism for consulting with local
elected officials in the rural portions of the state during STIP development.
The components of the 4P include:
• Individual county level meetings- The Transportation Commissioner and
CDOT's Regional Transportation Director meet with the county
commissioners and municipal officials within the county to discuss long-
range transportation needs, priorities, as well as the day to day
transportation issues facing the county.
• Regional meetings - The Transportation Commissioner(s) and CDOT's
Regional Transportation Director(s) meet with the Regional Planning
Commission for each Transportation Planning Region (TPR). These are
public: meetings during which project priorities are discussed and
proposed for inclusion in the STIR
• Statewide meeting - This public meeting, hosted by the Transportation
Commission, allows the Commission to hear public comments on the
draft STIP and provides direction to CDOT staff for preparing the final
STIP to be submitted to FHWA and FTA for approval.
The STIP can be amended as needed. Policy amendments to the STIP must go
through a formal public review and comment process, including determining
fiscal constraint impacts, etc. Policy amendments are processed biannually.
Administrative amendments have no major fiscal impact and generally
accommodate minor scheduling and funding changes. Administrative changes
may be processed monthly.
Statewide Transportation Improvement Program—2001 -2006
Statewide Transportation Improvement Program
2001 .2006
System Quality
Strategic Projects 40%
32%
Safety Program Delivery
%
5%
Mobility
22%
Statewide Transportation Improvement Program 119
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future•
The Transportation Commission adopted the FY2001 - 2006 ST P in June 2000,
programming approximately $7.4 billion. The above chart summarizes the
distribution of dollars to CDOT's major program areas.
120 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future.
FUTURE UPDATE & ISSUE Future Update and Issue Resolution (pp.
121-123)has been revised from the 75-
2000 draft to include a discussion of local
RESOLUTION roadway needs assessment process.
UPDATE CYCLE
The statewide plan is updated on a six-year cycle to accommodate changes in
conditions related to growth, development,employment, demographics and other
transportation related-conditions. The update process is initiated through
Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) and regional planning commissions
(RPCs) in the state's 15 Transportation Planning Regions(TPRs) as they update
their regional transportation plans to the new planning horizon. The regional plan
update cycle is approximately 15 months long. When the regional plan updates
have been completed, they are provided to CDOT to integrate and consolidate
into the updated statewide transportation plan. The state portion of the update
takes up to one year.
A caveat to the regional plan update cycle is necessary due to the presence of
air quality non-attainment areas within the state. The three MPOs in the non-
attainement areas are required by federal regulations to update their plans every
three years. Consequently, the 2020 plans for these three MPOs were
completed on 1998/1999 while the other TPRs were still in the process of
updating their regional plans. All three non-attainment MPOs have initiated their
processes for updating their plans to 2025 prior to the 2020 statewide
transportation plan's anticipated adoption in November 2000.
In anticipation of the MPO plan updates, CDOT recommends that all 15 TPRs
participate in the process of fiscally constraining regional plans to 2025 and not
limiting this fiscal constraint process to the three non-attainment MPOs. Each of
the regional planning commissions and the other two MPOs identified projects
beyond those included in the fiscally constrained element of the statewide
transportation plan. Consequently,these unfunded projects, some of which have
been prioritized at the TPR level, can compete with the non-attainment area
MPOs' priorities for the revenues projected to be available between 2021 and
2025. This effort would result in a "minor" update of the other 12 TPR plans
while the three non-attainment areas MPOs meet their requirement for a full plan
update.
Work in Progress
Several issues were raised during the update of the regional and statewide plans
to 2020 that have not been resolved:
♦ •
Future Update and Issue Resolution 121
.The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
• Several MPOs and RPCs have requested the Transportation
Commission to reopen its resource allocation process. As a first step,
COOT will work with the MPOs and RPCs to recommend a process
through which local and regional input will be solicited and considered.
The recommendation will be forwarded to the Commission at the
appropriate time. Related to this issue is the Transportation
Commission's decision to form a sub-committee to re-evaluate the Small
Urban Program, due to sunset in 2004. The Commission will initiate the
Small Urban Re-evaluation subcommittee in 2001, and will solicit input
from the Statewide Transportation Advisory Committee (STAC) on the
issue.
• A number of policy guidance areas requiring further development and
refinement have been identified in the Strategic Framework Chapter. An
example is developing a tiered transportation system, involving
refinement of the State Significant Corridors (SSCs), through continued
efforts on the transportation investment strategy and asset management
programs. A process is needed to ensure opportunities for public input
and dialogue on the policy guidance areas with the Transportation
Commission. The expectation is for all policy guidance areas to be
refined and in place in advance of the next full update of the regional and
statewide transportation plans.
• Other areas requiring further development prior to the next full plan
update cycle include:
a) clarifying how various modal programs integrate with the
regional planning process;
b) developing additional planning data and methods for analyzing
the data for use in the regional plan update process;
c) training and guidance on planning requirements such as Tile
VI and Environmental Justice;
d) consistency in revenue projections/resource allccatior
decisions through the planning update process;
e) guidance regarding integration of regional plans into tie
statewide plan;
f) incorporation of more transportation demand management
strategies into the statewide planning process and plan; and,
g) development of a statewide freight planning aprroach
including identifying appropriate data and analytical methods
A key activity related to addressing these issue areas will be the
planning process de-briefing with all participants in the 1998-1999
regional plan update cycle.
♦ --__
122 Future Update and Issue Resolution
♦The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future♦
• The identification of local roadway needs has been a significant
challenge due to the lack of reliable and consistent data and
methodologies for use by Colorado's numerous municipal and county
entities. In an attempt to identify a better method of assessing local
roadway needs on a statewide basis, CDOT, working through a
subcommittee of the Statewide Transportation Advisory Committee
(STAC), Colorado Municipal League (CML) and Colorado Counties, Inc.
(CCI), explored options for identifying local system requirements. The
results of this efforts are discussed in the Local Roadway Chapter
beginning on page 97. To the extent a more comprehensive picture of
the local street and roadway needs is desired for the next statewide
transportation plan, COOT will design a program for local roadway needs
assessment. This methodology would provide a consistent, comparable
and accepted method for assessing local roadway needs for the state's
270 municipalities and 63 counties. Needs would be developed for new
roads, paving gravel roads, reconstruction, bridges, maintenance and
operations. In addition, funding options for this assessment, and grants
to local governments will be explored.
♦ ♦
Future Update and Issue Resolution 123
♦ The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future ---�
Appendix A - Conformance with Federal and State Legislation
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan was developed through a planning process designed to meet all
state and federal legislative requirements. How each of the federal and state requirements was
addressed is summarized below.
Federal Legislative Requirements
1. The process for developing the plans and programs shall provide for consideration of all modes of
transportation and shall be continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive to the degree appropriate.
Response: The statewide transportation plan identifies needs and priorities inclusive of all modes of
transportation, as well as system preservation, maintenance and operation. At the regional level,
the Regional Planning Commissions and Metropolitan Planning Organizations consider the impact
of current and future traffic on the existing transportation system. Once demand is forecasted,
alternatives are examined to consider how demand can be addressed. Alternatives include trip
reductiion strategies, operational improvements, and a variety of modal solutions that can work in
conceit to meet travel demand.
The 2 CCR 604-2, Statewide Transportation Planning Process and Transportation Planning
Regions establishes a continuing, cooperative, comprehensive planning process. This process was
established to provide a grassroots level approach to identifying transportation needs. The process
for updating regional plans to cover the period 2001 to 2020 began in the spring of 1998.
Completed plans were provided to CDOT in November 1999 for integration into the statewide plan.
The Regional Planning Commissions (RPCs) and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs)
continue to be involved in regional and statewide planning activities, even when plans are not being
updated. Plan and STIP amendments are considered annually and the Statewide Transportation
Improvement Program (STIP) is updated biennially. The Statewide Transportation Advisory
Committee (STAC) meets quarterly, providing recommendations on regional and statewide
transportation plan amendments, discussing issues and providing advice to CDOT on
transportation matters. The STAC is comprised of one representative from each of the fifteen
transportation planning regions in the state.
2. The state shall coordinate with the metropolitan areas of the state.
Response: TEA-21 requires each of Colorado's five MPOs, in cooperation with CDOT, to develop long-
range plans. These metropolitan planning processes are generally more complex and
comprehensive than the processes used in the rural areas of the state. Three of Colorado's five
MPOs are required to comply with the Clean Air Act amendments, including doing air quality
conformity determinations on their long-range plans and short range programs. The three non-
attainment MPOs completed their 2020 Plans in the spring of 1998. The remaining two MPOs,
aligned with the update schedule for the ten rural areas and completed their plans in November
1999. Each of the five MPOs have a representative on the Statewide Transportation Advisory
Committee (STAC) and participation by both metropolitan and rural representatives have developed
a broader understanding of the state's transportation needs. The MPOs also participate with their
rural counterparts during the process of developing fiscally constrained transportation plans and
programs. The Transportation Commission allocates resources to CDOT's six transportation
regions. Consequently, each of the MPOs and RPCs within these six regions must come together
to determine which projects from the regional transportation plans will be prioritized as part of the
state's fiscally constrained transportation plan.
:3. The state shall carry out its responsibilities for the development of the transportation portion of he
Clean Air Act.
124 Appendix
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
Response: COOT complies with the requirements of the federal Clean Air Act and TEA,21. Specifically,
CDOT requires that all projects, plans, and programs that affect air quality non-attainment or
maintenance areas comply with the transportation conformity regulation.
Colorado has areas designated non-attainment or maintenance for the following pollutants: carbon
monoxide (3 areas); ozone (one area); and, PM10 (seven areas.)
4. The state's transportation planning process shall provide for the consideration of projects and
strategies that will:
a) Support the economic vitality of the United States, the states and metropolitan areas,
especially by enabling global competitiveness, productivity, and efficiency;
Response: The regional and statewide transportation planning process follows a format which provides
for the deliberate consideration of current and future demographic and economic forecasts and the
implications of these forecasts on the transportation system. A number of transportation
implications were addressed in the context of Colorado's current and future economic conditions,
particularly in terms of identifying key transportation corridors which link Colorado to other
economic markets within the U.S. and to other nations. Included in these considerations are high
priority corridors such as the Ports to Plains corridor (Lubbock, TX to Denver, CO); and the Front
Range Toll Road, proposed in the Eastern Plains paralleling Colorado's primary N-S corridor, 1-25.
The planning process also raised awareness to a number of freight rail corridors considered for
abandonment and the impact such abandonment would have on Colorado. This led to the
Transportation Commission's work on a draft statewide rail policy that will provide direction for the
state's interest and role in significant rail corridors in the state. The regional planning process also
gave serious consideration of the role tourism plays in Colorado's economy, and identified
transportation related needs and priorities associated with this important industry.
b) Increase the safety and security of the transportation system for motorized end non-
motorized users;
Response: In its resource allocation process, the Transportation Commission programmed
resources into the safety investment category, targeting programs such as roadway safety
and driver behavior programs. Additional resources were programmed for addressing
safety-related transportation problems, identified and prioritized through the regional
planning process. In addition, CDOT provides safety-related programs for bicycle and
pedestrian safety and, through the regional planning process, is completing the update of
the high priority bicycle corridors, which will assist in programming resources to improve
shoulders along these corridors for both bicyclist and motorist safety.
c) Increase the accessibility and mobility options available to people and freight;
Response: CDOT's planning process provided a number of mobility-related tools and
enhancements for the Regional Planning Commissions during the update of the plans.
Included was a transportation planning data set applicable to GIS-based software to assist
Regional Planning Commissions in their demand analysis and alternatives analysis tasks.
COOT also completed a Transit Needs and Benefits Study to provide current information to
the Regional Planning Commissions on operating and capital costs associated with
providing a basic level as well as an enhanced level of transit service within their planning
regions. CDOT also commissioned a Freight Study to provide information and assistance to
the Regional Planning Commissions concerning freight-related issues in their respective
regions, and identifying transportation projects aimed at addressing freight related
concerns. These projects were considered in the regional planning process during the
identification of the preferred and fiscally constrained regional transportation plans.
d) Protect and enhance the environment, promote energy conservation, and improve
quality of life;
Appendix 125
♦ The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future -4,
Response:Response: The 2020 plan includes a Socioeconomic and Environmental Profile chapter This chapter
addresses the current population and employment condition of the state and includes an analysis cif
the anticipated changes that will occur by the year 2020. The chapter also contains an
Environmental Overview that provides an assessment of the state's environmental situation and
identifies strategies currently being developed to integrate environmental considerations into the
planning process as early as possible.
CDOT is currently coordinating with environmental agencies to develop a process for streamlining
the environmental review process especially during the major investment study process.
Partnerships with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Health and
Human Services have be established to determine effective methods that will assist in improving
the project development phase by integrating the NEPA process as early as possible in the
transportation planning process. This process involves coordinating environmental reviews for
highway and mass transit projects early on in the planning process while looking at potential
impacts of both the natural and human environment.
e) Enhance the integration and connectivity of the transportation system, across and
between modes, for people and freight;
Response: CDOT released the document entitled Integrating CDOT Modal Planning Processes
with the Statewide Planning Process in 1998. This report, targeting primarily the Strategic
Transportation Project Investment Program, transit programs, the aviation planning
process, and Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) planning, details processes that
would better clarify the roles, responsibilities and interrelationships of process that needed
to be integrated into the regional and statewide planning process. During the update of the
regional transportation plans, CDOT also conducted a review of the State Significant
Bicycle Corridors as part of the process. Continual efforts to integrate remaining modal
programs and an evaluation of their effectiveness will be completed by mid-2000.
f) Promote efficient system management and operation;
Response: To meet the growing demands of the state, CDOT is in the process of improving its current
infrastructure through the use of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS). The ITS Strategic Plan
proves direction to CDOT to ensure plans and programs integrate management and operation of
transportation systems that will function as an intermodal transportation system.
CDOT worked with various TPR and MPOs in 1999 to develop an ITS Strategic Plan. This
process entailed a collaborative working session in which all participants were encouraged
to provide input to develop a statewide vision for ITS. Through this effort, a list of projects
was established which were included in the transportation plans. Further, CDOT's Shared
Resources efforts, public/private partnerships which allow provide use of public highway
right-of-way by the private sector to install advanced telecommunications infrastructure.
CDOT uses telecommunications to deploy its ITS strategies for improving transportation
system operations.
Other efforts under way involve upgrading the Pavement and the Bridge management
systems. The pavement management system ensures an effective link between network
level surface treatment decision making and project specific surface treatment activities.
Roadway surface condition data is collected annually to determine the Remaining Service
Life over the next several years. This data assists in determining the Good/Fair/Poor state
of the system. The 2020 plan discusses this system and the strategies that will be used to
determine optimum use of the State's surface treatment dollars.
The Bridge Program obtains information to report to the Federal Highway Administration.
Information is also included in the National Bridge Inventory (NBI) and is used by Congress
to allocate Federal Highway Bridge Replacemem and Rehabilitation Program Funding
�— ---♦
126 APpendi(
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
(HBRRP). The Federal Select List of Bridges contains a list of qualifying bridges in
Colorado. The regional and the statewide transportation plans include bridges that will
qualify for replacement or repair over the next 20 years. These bridges have a Sufficiency
Rating (SR) of eighty or less and must be either Structurally Deficient (SD) or Functionally
Obsolete (FO).
g) Emphasize the preservation of the existing transportation system.
Response: CDOT's transportation investment strategy includes a System Quality category whin
addresses road surface, structure, roadside facilities and appearance, rest areas, traffic operations,
tunnels, and maintenance of other modes (e.g., airport runway pavement condition.) System quality
goals are established by the Transportation Commission and resources are allocated to the various
programs aimed at protecting the state's investment in its existing transportation system.
The Transportation Commission has established a number of system preservation policies, such as
corridor optimization, and a state rail policy addressing the state's role in preserving transportation
corridors when a significant rail line is being abandoned.
CDOT and the Regional Planning Commissions (including the MPOs) realize the potential of :he
federal Transportation and Community and System Preservation Pilot (TCSP) program for
preserving the existing transportation system. This program funds innovative projects that assis: in
integrating transportation investment strategies, community preservation, land development and
environmental quality. One objective of the grant program is CDOT and various local governments
have submitted applications for funding under this program. For fiscal year 2000, three project;
were selected. These projects included The Denver Union Terminal Work and Entertainment
Connection, the 16th Street Pedestrian Improvements, and Estes Valley Transportation
Alternatives Feasibility Study,
5. Consider the concerns of non-metropolitan local elected officials;
Response: Section 43-1-1101 of the Colorado Revised Statutes (C.R.S.) provides for the creation of up
to fifteen transportation planning regions (TPRs) to assist with the development of the statewide
transportation plan. Of these fifteen regions, thirteen of them are fully or partially rural and fourteen
of them have established Regional Planning Commissions that act as the formal policy body,
directing the transportation planning activities within the TPR. Each RPC consists of elected
officials that represent counties and/or municipalities within the region.
The rural Regional Planning Commissions, as well as the urban Metropolitan Planning
Organizations, produce regional transportation plans which are submitted to the state for integration
into the statewide transportation plan. The Regional Planning Commissions, including the Iv1POs,
participate with their respective CDOT Region Director to develop a set of fiscally constrained
projects for inclusion in the fiscally constrained element of the statewide transportation plan. Each
year, during CDOT's Project Priority Programming Process (4 P) which updates the Statewide
Transportation Improvement Program, the Regional Planning Commissions, MPOs, CDOT
representatives and Transportation Commissioners collaborate on selecting projects consistent with
the state's fiscally constrained transportation plan for inclusion in the STIP.
6. Consider the concerns of Indian Tribal governments and federal land management agencies that
have jurisdiction over land within the boundaries of the State;
Responses Colorado has two Indian Tribal Nations, the Southern Ute and the Ute Mountain Ute Tribes,
located in the southwestern part of the state that are incorporated in the Southwest Transportation
Planning Region. Representatives participate on the Southwest Regional Planning Commission
and the Statewide Transportation Advisory Committee (STAC). This ensures adequate involvement
and inclusion into all phases of the planning process. Regional transportation plans from each tribal
government are incorporated in both the regional and statewide transportation plans.
Federal land management agencies such as the National Park Service and the National Forest
Service are invited to be involved in the transportation planning process at the regional as well as
Appendix 127
4 The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future --�
statewide level. Staffing limitations pose a barrier to active participation by the federal land
agencies in all of the transportation planning regions. Specific workshops have been held with the
federal and state land agencies to provide information on the state's transportation planning
process, and opportunities for their participation and sharing of information and plans. A
memorandum of agreement between CDOT with the U.S. Forest Service, and the Bureau of Land
Management, specifically addressed this latter point, and copies of the adopted statewide
transportation plan are provided to these federal land management agencies.
7. Coordination of transportation plans and programs being carried on outside the metropolitan areas;
Response: The Regional Transportation Planning Guidebook updated in 1998, was designed to assist
local governments and interested parties with the update of the regional transportation plans
CDOT distributed the Guidebook to each TPR and MPO and encouraged them to update their
plans using the eleven primary steps identified. These steps were a framework for the plans to
ensure certain elements were addressed and to ensure consistent information was provided
Representatives from CDOT provided guidance to each TPR and their consultants during the
update process. The 2020 regional plans have been summarized and presented in a technical
document that supplements the statewide plan. The 2020 plan also contains data extracted from
the regional plans that is presented on a statewide basis.
B. The statewide planning process shall provide interested parties with a reasonable opportunity to comment on The
proposed plan.
Response: Upon releasing the draft 2020 statewide transportation plan for public review and comment in
July 2000, CDOT held public forums in each of the fifteen transportation planning regions. These
forums were designed to provide the public with a general overview of the planning process and
contents of the plan and allow the public to ask questions, made comments, and provide feedback
for Transportation commission consideration prior to finalizing the plan.
Public participation in all phases of the statewide planning process is crucial to ensuring effective
input. Each phase of the planning process has an extensive public involvement component and will
use different techniques based on the nature of the process.
As federal guidelines suggest, public involvement should be proactive. Early and continuous
involvement is important for policy or project decisions. Informational flyers were distributed to
citizens and interest groups to keep them abreast of upcoming planning meetings. The draft and
final transportation plans were distributed to various locations throughout the state in order to allow
for public review and comment. Also, public meetings were held in each TPR to obtain input on the
draft regional and statewide transportation plans. CDOT continually conducts yearly public,
involvement opportunities which include quarterly newsletters that target planning activities, an
annual report that provides a status on the implementation of the statewide transportation plan and
information on project amendments to the statewide transportation plan as necessary.
The overall goal of CDOT is to provide the highest quality of transportation services possible to
customers. Since the citizens of Colorado are varied, groups must be identified and invited into the
planning process if we are to effectively meet their needs. This includes not only the general public
but also business and industry, organizations that represent people with specific transportation
needs and the transportation services providers.
9. The statewide transportation plan shall identify transportation strategies necessary to effciently serve the
mobility needs of people.
Response: During the development of the updated regional transportation plans, the Regional Planning
Commissions and Metropolitan Planning Organizations were encouraged to consider alternative
• ---♦
128 Appendix
• 'The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
solutions when addressing mobility issues and problems. In order to consider these solutions, the
regions had to examine all transportation modes within the state. These included aviation, bicycles,
highway, pedestrian, transit, and rail. CDOT-commissioned studies, such as the Transit Needs and
Benefit Study, the Travel Demand Management (TDM) Toolbox, Intercity Bus Study, results of the
Modal Survey (1997) and other pertinent modal planning data were made available to the RPCs ':o
assist them in developing a multi-modal transportation plan addressing their mobility needs.
Step seven of the Regional Planning Guidebook, that was utilized during the update of the 2020
plans, recommended each region develop a list of options that address the mobility and geometric
needs of each major corridor in the area. This process was done with the inclusion of
Transportation Demand Management (TDM), the No Build, and low cost options such as
Transportation Systems Management (TSM). The end result of the analysis was a series of
transportation solutions that meet the needs of passenger and freight transportation through each
major transportation corridor. The 2020 Statewide Plan incorporates these alternatives in the
preferred plan to assist with implementation.
10. The statewide transportation plan may include a financial plan that demonstrates how the plan can be
implemented, identifies resources from public and private sources that are reasonably expected to be
available to carry out the plan, and recommends any additional financing strategies for needed
projects and programs.
Response: The 2020 Statewide Plan includes a preferred plan and a fiscally constrained plan The
preferred plan identifies the transportation needs of the state for the next 20 years. This is the
chapter that reflects a transportation vision.
The fiscally constrained plan contains only those projects that can expect to receive state arid
federal funding that will be allocated over the 20 year period. Projects identified in the fiscally
constrained plan were prioritized at the regional level, with representatives from the RPCs and
MPOs working with their CDOT Region Director to identify projects to be funded with Other
Regional Priority funds. In addition, the state's fiscally constrained plan contains various statewide
programs, such as the Strategic Projects, surface treatment, bridges, maintenance, etc.
State Requirements
1. Section 43-1-1101 C.R S. recognizes the Department of Transportation as the proper body, in
cooperation with Regional Planning Commissions and local government officials, for developing
and maintaining the state transportation planning process and the state transportation plan. This
statute also provides for the creation of up to fifteen transportation planning regions (TPRs) and a
transportation planning process set by rules and regulations promulgated by the Transportation
Commission.
Response: The Transportation Commission adopted the rules and regulations for the statewide and
regional transportation planning process and the boundaries for the Transportation Planning
Regions in September 1991. These rules and regulations were updated in 1994 and 1997.
2. State statute requires CDOT to integrate and consolidate the regional transportation plans for the
transportation planning regions into a comprehensive statewide transportation plan.
Response: In November 1999, the Regional Planning Commissions provided CDOT with their finalized
regional transportation plans, covering the time period 2001 through 2020. CDOT integrated these
plans, primarily be incorporating the regional-selected and prioritized projects with the statewide
programs identified by the Transportation Commission. Further, CDOT organized the needs
identified in the regional transportation plans along with the statewide program needs into the five
investment categories as a first step towards integrating the transportation investment strategy into
the planning process.
The state plan is to include:
♦ ---�
Appendix 129
♦ The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future _--�
a) An emphasis on multi-modal transportation considerations, including the connectivity between
modes of transportation;
Response: To assist with the update to the Regional Transportation Plans, CDOT provided information
extracted from the Transit Needs and Benefits Study, the Freight Infrastructure Study, and other
modal program information for inclusion in the regional transportation plans. Steps are currently
underway to develop methods to better integrate modal planning processes with the statewide
planning process.
b) An emphasis on coordination with county and municipal land use planning, including
examination of the relationship between land use decisions and transportation needs and the
exploration of opportunities for preservation of transportation corridors;
Response: The 2020 plan recognizes the relationship between transportation and land use. In March of
1997, the Governor's Office of Energy Conservation, the Department of Local Affairs, a citizens
advisory committee, and CDOT coordinated the development of a guidebook entitled, Managing
Colorado's Future. This guidebook identifies methods for integrating local and regional land use, air
quality, and transportation plans. This guidebook was used as a tool in updating the regional
transportation plans.
CDOT continues to play an active role in supporting the Governor's Smart Growth Initiatives: saving
natural landscapes, promoting strong neighborhoods, improving the transportation system, and
providing opportunities for a better life for citizens.
c) The development of area-wide multi-modal management plans in coordination with the process
of developing the element of the state plan.
Response: COOT established six ad hoc steering committees in 1996 to assist with the development of
modal plans. These plans addressed aviation, bicycle/pedestrian, commercial vehicle, rail, transit,
and travel demand management. In order to meet the needs of one of the twelve Transportation
Commission policies, Intermodalism, the Commission adopted the policy document entitled CDOTs
lntermodal Vision, Goals and Strategies. This document provided three goals and respective
strategies that assisted the Transportation Planning Regions in updating their transportation to
address the use of alternative modes.
130 Appendix
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future• _--_♦
Appendix B - Title VI and Environmental Justice
Background
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, and Executive Order 12898 on Environmental Justice are important
considerations in the transportation planning process. Title VI requires nondiscrimination in federally
assisted programs, including metropolitan and statewide planning. Environmental Justice is defined as
"the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or
income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies. Fair treatment means that no group of people, including a racial, ethnic, or
socioeconomic group, should bear a disproportionate share of the negative environmental consequences
resulting from industrial, municipal, and commercial operations or the execution of federal, state, local,
and tribal programs and policies."
Current Activities
CDOT's current activities related to Title VI and Environmental Justice requirements include the following:
• CDOT, through agreements with the Regional Planning Commissions (RPCs), provides the RPCs
with planning assistance funds to undertake regional planning activities. Title VI requirements are
incorporated into these agreements between CDOT and the RPCs.
• CDOT provides guidance to the RPCs concerning the preparation and update of their regional
transportation plans, including public involvement responsibilities. Primary guidance is from the
Statewide Transportation Planning Process and Transportation Planning Region Rules and
Regulations (2 CCR 604-2) adopted by the Transportation Commission. Additional guidance is
provided in CDOT's Regional Planning Guidebook. Briefly, the directions provided by these resources
are described below.
• RPCs are asked to consider current and future populations in their planning process, including
those people traditionally under-served by the transportation system.
• CDOT provides RPCs with a transportation planning dataset assembled from several sources,
including the U.S. Census, and the Colorado Division of Local Affairs' State Demographer's
Office. Regional Planning Commissions are asked to consider low income, minority, elderly,
disabled populations. households without vehicles, etc. Further, they are asked to supplement
this information with local data for special population groups in their areas, such as students,
seasonal workers,workers in tourism or recreation industries, etc.
• The socio-economic data is to be used by the RPCs in the Mobility Demand Analysis phase of
the regional planning process, to determine projected demand on the transportation system and
identify system deficiencies. The results of this analysis are considered in the next phase of the
process, Alternatives Analysis. In this phase, the Regional Planning Commissions are asked to
consider the range of multi-modal transportation improvements and travel demand management
strategies for addressing transportation deficiencies.
• Regional Planning Commissions are provided guidance for meeting the public involvement
requirements of the planning process. Specifically, the RPCs are required to maintain a nailing
list of people interested in the transportation planning and are guided to supplement the nailing
list with persons typically under-served by transportation in their areas. The mailing list s one
vehicle the RPCs are asked to use to inform the public how to become involved in plan and STIP
Appendix 131
• The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future --•
updates. RPCs are required to hold public involvement opportunities at the beginning of the
regional plan update process and for review and comment on their draft transportation plan.
• CDOT prepared guidelines for public involvement in the statewide planning process and prcvided
these guidelines to the Regional Planning Commissions for reference. The state's guidelines discuss
mechanisms for outreach to the public, including under-served, and preparations for anyone with
special needs wishing to attend the public involvement activities.
I, In January 2000, an assessment of CDOT's Title VI Implementation Plan was conducted in
cooperation with Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Department of Justice. In the
Strengths and Major Accomplishments section of the assessment report, the state's transportation
planning, public involvement and transit processes were cited as models for CDOT.
Future Activities Related to Title VI and Environmental Justice
CDOT anticipates making several refinements to the planning process to strengthen consideration of Title
VI and Environmental Justice, such as:
• CDOT will propose refinements to the statewide planning rules and regulations based on federal
requirements for Title VI and Environmental Justice provisions.
• The transportation planning data set will be enhanced to include the most recent Census 2000 data
for low income, minority, elderly, disabled persons, and households without vehicles. This information
will be provided in a geographic information system (GIS) mapable format.
• The Regional Planning Guidebook will be refined to:
• Include suggested methods for considering Title VI and Environmental Justice concerns in
developing the regional transportation plan, particularly in terms of identifying where under-served
people are located so their transportation needs will be specifically considered;
• Suggest methods for inventorying existing transportation services in relation to under-served
populations;
• Suggest Title VI and Environmental Justice related criteria for RPCs to consider in their project
prioritization.
• CDOT will refine its Public Involvement guidelines to:
• Expand outreach activities to under-served populations, including developing and maintaining a
directory of organizations and locations of active minority groups and recognized leaders
throughout the state. This will help establish a dialogue about the Transportation Planning
Process in geographical areas;
• Provide mechanisms for making public involvement opportunities more accessible to under
served populations, such as holding meetings in low-income, minority neighborhoods, advertising
and providing information to newspapers, bulletins, active neighborhood associations, and media
outlets utilized by low-income, minority and other under-served populations.
• CDOT will explore various mapping techniques to assess planning and programming decisions in
relation to Title VI and Environmental Justice provisions.
132 Appendix
♦ The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future —_
CDOT will develop these refinements through a participative process, utilizing various mechanisms such
as workshops, de-briefing sessions, focus groups, surveys, etc., with the goal of having all refinements in
place prior to the next update of the regional and statewide transportation plans.
Appendix 133
♦ The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future --_�
Appendix C - Public Involvement Process
The Colorado Department of Transportation continues to have a proactive public involvement process at
all stages of planning and project development. The views, ideas and opinions of all interested parties on
the future of Colorado and its transportation system are important to assist in setting the future direction
for transportation in the state.
Refinement of the Public Involvement Requirements
Prior to the adoption of TEA-21, CDOT modified the "Rules and Regulations for the Statewide
Transportation Planning Process and Transportation Planning Regions"(the Rules). This amendment,
which occurred in August of 1997, incorporates more current planning requirements proposed by the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Draft documents
were distributed and a public hearing with the Transportation Commission was held to provide citizens
and interest groups the opportunity to comment on the changes.
Refinement of Public Involvement Techniques
The "Guidelines for Public Involvement in Statewide Transportation Planning and Programming" ware
amended in early 1998 to reflect the new requirements and techniques recommended through the
document titled, "Public Involvement Techniques for Transportation Decision-making."
CDOT strives to have an inclusive process by aggressively seeking to identify and involve the affected
and interested public, including those traditionally under-served by existing transportation systems and
facilities. It is important to involve the public early, often and continually
Two major comments received on the planning process were that citizens were not receiving information
on the meetings and they were confused about how to get involved in the process. To meet this need,
CDOT mailed out address cards asking for updates for the database. Approximately 1,000 cards were
returned. The "Get Plugged In!" brochure provides citizens with a step-by-step process for getting
involved in the planning process.
A statewide planning database of over 4,000 mailing addresses is maintained and continually updated to
advise interested individuals and agencies of on-going planning activities. This database includes
representatives of various transportation agencies, county and municipal contacts, representatives of
Indian tribal governments and organizations that reach those traditionally under-served by the existing
transportation system. Any person that desires to be included in the planning process is welcome to
participate.
In order to keep citizens abreast of the planning process and amendments to the current transportation
plan, quarterly newsletters and annual reports are submitted to citizens. In some cases, information flyers
were developed to inform the public of upcoming opportunities. Each of these documents provides a
wealth of information on studies and programs that drive the planning process. Citizens also have the
option of educating themselves on the overall Department by interacting through the internet. CDOT's
website provides information on various offices throughout CDOT and allows people to quickly access
information on upcoming planning meetings. This website, http://www.dotstate.co.us, is accessible
through any Internet service provider.
134 Appendix
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future---_�
Public Involvement in the Regional Planning Process
Much like the 1996 document, the current 2020 plan was developed using the grassroots approach. The
public was continually included in the regional planning process during the update of the 2020 regional
transportation plans. Each Regional Planning Commission held a public meeting to gather input on the
region's visions and goals for the 20-year horizon. This meeting was the initial meeting to begin the
process.
Meeting announcements were sent to citizens and media outlets to provide information on 'upcoming
planning meetings throughout the update cycle. A public forum and meeting was held in each area to
provide the public opportunity to view and comment on the 2020 regional transportation plan.
Other Public Involvement Related Activities
A series of customer surveys provided valuable information regarding the public's perception of the state
of Colorado and the transportation system. The Colorado Department of Transportation Modal
Transportation Survey was completed in 1997. This survey addressed the citizen's perception of mobility
and their desire to have and use alternative modes as a means of travel. The Statewide Resident Survey
and the Freight Focus Group: Final Report of Results were conducted in the early spring of 2000. This
survey included questions related to Coloradans' perceptions regarding safety, system preservation and
mobility. This survey information supplements the performance indicators for the Department's investment
strategy. The Freight Focus group was conducted in order to determine the freight industry's perception
of the transportation system, in a more in-depth analysis, in regards to congestion.
Public Involvement in the Statewide Planning Process
A similar public involvement process was used during the development of the 2020 plan. Early in the
process, CDOT sent out a written survey asking what the respondents considered important to
Colorado's future. Approximately 300 surveys were returned and this information was considered in the
development of the state plan document. Information on the plan's context, socioeconomic trends,
existing transportation revenues and policy direction were distributed for public review and comment in
late March 2000 and presented at the Transportation Commission's Public Hearing on April 19, 2000.
This hearing provided interested individuals and organizations an opportunity to comment on the 2020
Fiscally Constrained Project Appendix and the policy areas being considered by the Commission. The
public will also be provided the opportunity to review and comment on the draft 2020 plan at public
meetings and forums in each transportation planning region during July and August 2000. The
Department will prepare responses to the significant comments received during the public comment
period and prepare a final draft for adoption by the Transportation Commission in September 2000.
�► ----1
Appendix 135
♦ The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future _--�
Appendix D - Public Comments and Responses
In order to meet the requirements of the Transportation Equity Act of the Twenty-first Century, the
Colorado Department of Transportation released the draft 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan for public
review and comment on July 7, 2000. Notices were sent to over 3,000 individuals on our mailing list. This
includes not only the general public but also business and industry, organizations that represent. people
with specific transportation needs and the transportation services providers. The draft document was
made available for review at approximately 70 public libraries, county clerk offices, on the Department s
web site and on request.
Twenty-eight open houses were held around the state to obtain public input on the draft Plan. The table
below shows the number of people who attended the open houses and the number of comments received
from citizens and special interest groups within each Transportation Planning Region (TPR).
Attendees Comments
TPRIMPO Review Locations At Open Received
Houses
Greater Denver Area 30 44 7C
Pikes Peak Area 3 16 6
North Front Range/
7 19 3
Upper Front Range
Pueblo 2 21 1
Grand Junction 2 14 1
Eastern 12 54 1
Southeast 6 24 1
San Luis Valley 12 10 2_
Gunnison Valley 24 37 0
Southwest 6 25 2_
Intermountain 6 23
Northwest 6 25
Central Front Range 12 12
South Central 4 8 0
Total 132 _ 332 96
The public involvement period began on July 7, 2000 and officially concluded on September 8, 2000.
Following is a summary of the substantive comments that were received during this review period and the
responses to each one:
Comments on the Bicycle Shoulder Policy/Draft High Tier Bicycle Corridor Map:
Citizens want the Department to consider the development of bicycle and pedestrian paths and routes as
an alternative to help alleviate some of the traffic congestion and encourage the use of bicycle
transportation. They believe that off-road bicycle trails should be investigated for feasibility prior to
136 Appendix
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future
committing funds to simply add shoulders. Significant local bicycle corridors along state iighways should
be considered if they are used as key commuter routes.
Response: The draft map included in the draft 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan was a compilation of
data from 32 Bicycle Town Meetings that were held from October of 1999 through March of 2000.
Participants indicated their highest priority was to add shoulders and they bicycle on all highways,
mostly near the town centers. The Colorado Transportation Commission's Interrciodal Committee
has been revising the draft Bicycle Corridor Map in response to various comments received. The
revised map illustrates where roadway resurfacing projects are scheduled to occur within the next 3
years, and the locations of shoulder projects within the 2020 Plan's fiscally constrained element
and unfunded element. The revised map also reflects 10-, 15-, and 20-mile radii around selected
municipalities of at least 5,000 people. The title of the map has been changed to High Priority
Shoulders Projects since they include more than bicycle projects. Maps will be distributed for
further public involvement and will be referred by the Intermodal Committee to the full Commission
later this year.
Comments on the Rail Corridor Preservation Policy:
Significant comments were received regarding the Rail Corridor map. The consensus of comments was
that the scope of the map is insufficient. The Rail Corridor map does not include eastern Colorado;
therefore the assumption is that there are no significant rail lines in that area. The map also indicates that
there are also no rail lines in western Colorado that are determined to be significant.
Other citizens requested the Department to adopt the Colorado Passenger Rail Feasibility Study (1998)
as a blue print for determining future passenger rail corridors in the state. They also want the CBOT to
consider a low cost commuter rail service in several major corridors.
Response:: All areas of the state are equally important and the Rail Corridor map is currently being
revised to show the entire state of Colorado. The Transportation Commission will be discussing the
Policy and Guidance Statements at the October 18 workshop.
Modal Flexibility of New Transportation Revenues:
Citizens and special interest groups agreed that the statement appears to eliminate all flexibility for use of
existing funds for alternative modes and it does not support flexibility for new revenue sources that do not
require voter approval. They support maximum modal flexibility for current and new sources of revenue
within constitutional, legislative and regulatory constraints. They would like the Department to go further
with the multi-modal concept and eliminate the"highway department" mentality.
Response:: The recommendation is to merge this policy guidance with the policy guidance on Flexible
Funding for High Priority Modal Projects. Further, the recommendation is to:
a) Recognize the role of alternative modes in congested corridors and in addressing uncer-
served populations;
b) Allow use of Other Regional Priority funds for alternative modes which have been identified
through the regional planning process and benefit the state transportation system;
c) Support utilizing federal and Senate Bill 1 funding flexibility on strategic projects where it
benefits the state transportation system;
d) Support modal flexibility of existing and new voter approved transportation revenues wilhin
constitutional, legislative, and regulatory constraints and Commission program priorities.
Sharing of Transportation Revenues with Local Governments:
Comments expressed concern that the policy guidance indicates the Department is not supportive of the
traditional sharing the current Highway User Tax Fund (HUTF) or increases to the HUTF Commentors did
not want the policy guidance to be limit support for sharing just new voter approved revenues with local
governments. Further, commentors would like to see acknowledgment that the current funding for local
road improvements is not adequate and new sources must be considered.
Appendix 137
♦ The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future ----4
Response: The recommendation is to clarify the language of the guidance to clarify the Transportation
Commission supports the continued sharing, as prescribed by existing formula, of the HUTF and
any increases to the HUTF. Further recommendations include recognition of the significant
demands placed on local governments to provide and maintain municipal and county roads and
bridges and support for sharing of new sources of voter approved statewide transportation
revenues with local governments.
Funding for Off System Roads:
C:ommentors expressed concern that this policy will not allow regionally significant projects on local
roadways to receive state funds even though they may be designated as part of the National Highway
System or have a direct benefit to the state highway system. The policy should be based on need and
importance to the public roadway system and to citizens. They would like Transportation Commission to
consider funding off-system road improvements when they result in improvements to carrying capacity of
state roads.
Response: The recommendation is to revise the policy guidance to recognize that the state and local
roads are a continuous system that must be addressed in partnership with local governments.
However, given the needs of the state highway system, the recommendation is to limit the funds
under Transportation Commission jurisdiction to state highways except where trades with local
govemments are under consideration.
Tiering the Transportation System:
This guidance should support tiering beyond the needs of CDOT and should include every area of the
transportation system. The policy should be clarified to indicate the effect this effort would have on all
areas of the state. The Department should work in cooperation with local agencies in establishing the tier
system and the tiering efforts should include consideration of the State Significant Corridors (SSC)
adopted in the 2015 Statewide Transportation Plan.
Response: The recommendation is to expand the policy guidance to recognize the value of a tiered
transportation system to aid in optimizing investment; support development of performance
objectives appropriate to the role facilities play in the transportation system; refine adopted State
Significant Corridors based on transportation investment and asset management programs and
work with transportation system stakeholders to define tiers.
No Net Growth in Centerline Miles
Commentors expressed concern that this policy guidance appears to contradict the policy guidance on
corridor preservation. Also, this policy guidance raised questions about the implied significance of lane-
miles over centerline miles. Comments suggested state roads be analyzed for "state significance" and a
partnership should be established between the state and local governments.
Response: The recommendation is to combine the No Net Growth in Centerline Miles policy guidance
with the Corridor Preservation Policy Guidance. Further, the recommendation is to expand the
policy guidance to include: clarification that given current resources, there is a continued high
priority on preservation, enhancement and maintenance of the existing infrastructure; recognition
that judicious expansion of the state highway system may be necessary to respond to projected
growth and expansion may include increases in current corridor capacity, addition of new corridors,
or re-designation of local roads; additions to the state system are contingent on the availability of
funds, an exchange of facilities with local governments, or partnerships with public and private
entities; and that any additions to the state transportation system must be consistent with the role
and function of the state transportation system.
Flexible Funding for High Priority Modal Projects
Commentors expressed concern that although significant local commitment is needed for FTA funds
federal funds through TEA 21 are flexible for these projects. Further, commentors questioned why
138 Appendix
♦ The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future _--�
significant local financial commitment is not required for roadway projects if they are to be required of
alternative mode projects. Commentors expressed that fiscally constrained plans should include all
modes of transportation and highway needs must not take priority over non-highway transportation
needs.
Response: The recommendation is to combine this policy guidance with the policy guidance on Modal
Flexibility of New Transportation Revenues. Please see response on page 136.
Corridor Optimization/Corridor Alternative Analysis Planning Procedures
Commentors asked for clarification how this policy guidance relates to alternatives analyses, the NEPA
process, and the role it plays in rural areas. Commentors also expressed that implementation of the
projects should go through the Regional Planning Process.
Response: The recommendation is to keep the current policy guidance wording at this time as Corridor
Optimization guidelines are currently being drafted with involvement of stakeholders which should
assist in clarifying the intent of Corridor Optimization and respond to the concerns expressed
above.
Corridor Preservation
Commentors asked for clarification between this policy statement and the "No Net Growth in Center Line
Miles" policy. Also, comprehensive plans and other development tools for linkages to land use and
transportation should be referenced in the policy guidance.
Response: The recommendation is to combine this policy guidance with the policy guidance on No Net
Growth in Center Line Miles. Please see response on page 137.
Telecommunications
Commentors suggested the policy statement be revised to allow for planning regions to be eligible for
State transportation funds for telecommunications projects if the Department supports development and
integration of a common ITS architecture. State should coordinate with the Office of Technology and the
public entities involved with developing telecommunications systems. Need to consider if the policy will
affect the use of state owned right of way for telecommunication.
Response: The recommendation is to expand the language of the policy guidance to clarify that Regional
Planning Commissions and Metropolitan Planning Organizations are encouraged to consider ITS
projects within their regional transportation plans; clarify that ITS projects are eligible for Other
Regional Priority funding; and to express commitment to coordination and planning' among state,
local governments, and private providers.
Small Urban Funds
Several areas have expressed concern regarding the sunsetting of the Small Urban Program. These
areas would like the program to continue past 2004 since these funds are used for critical urban area
projects which may not otherwise be eligible to compete for Other Regional Priority funds or should not
have to compete against projects in the rural areas. Commentors suggest that The FTA recognizes the
difference between urban and rural areas and funds accordingly and CDOT should do likewise to avo d
creating undue competition between urban areas and rural areas for federal and state transponation
resources.
Response: The recommendation is to clarify the commitment to create a committee to re-evaluate the
program prior to its sunset in 2004, and to have STAC representation on the re-evaluation
committee.
♦ --♦
Appendix 139
O The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future --•
State State Significant Corridors
Commentors expressed The 2020 Plan should recognize the need for a prioritized system of corridors
both statewide and regionally. Regionally significant corridors in the 2025 Regional Transportation Plans
should be eligible for State and Federal funds.
Response: The recommendation is to address State Significant Corridors within the policy guidance for
Tiering the Transportation System. See response on page 137.
Other Substantive Comments
Transit
Some respondents requested the following policy statements be added to the Transportation
Commissions Policy and Guidance Statement section of the plan:
"The Transportation Commission supports the need for state revenues for transit services
throughout Colorado, especially the current need for the state to pay one-half of the match to
obtain federal funds for transit capital needs prioritized through the regional transportation
planning and prioritization process during STIP development. Such state funding for transit may
come from current transportation revenues such as surplus general funds or from voter approved
new sources."
"As the population of Colorado continues to grow we should anticipate an increased need for
greater capacity of multiple modes of travel. To that end, the commission and CDOT should
encourage, plan and develop improved public transportation services"
Response:: Recommendation is to include new policy guidance for transit which recognizes that transit is
an integral component of Colorado's transportation system; recognizes transit benefits mobility by
providing an alternative to congested roads, options for travel, energy savings, and environmental
benefits; recognizes transit as necessary to provide transportation access to jobs, medical services,
and educational institutions for population groups traditionally underserved by transportation,
including Colorado's increasing population 65 years and older; and to support development of a
new funding source to supplement local transit capital needs and fund intermodal projects that
benefit the state transportation system.
Alamosa Bypass
Citizens in Alamosa, Colorado were inquiring about the status of the Alamosa Bypass Project that would
provide an alternative travel route through the city. They are in favor of the bypass, but are against the
plans to close of some of the major exits into the business district.
Response: The study for the Alamosa Bypass is currently in the Fiscally Constrained Plan. The
Department has been continually meeting with residents to discuss concerns and develop
alternatives.
I-70/Dillon Noise Barrier
Residents in the Dillon Valley submitted concerns about the postponement of the noise barrier project
along 1-70 and Dillon Valley. They are requesting information on the future plans for the project.
Response: Background information was submitted to those that requested a status. The Department and
the Intermountain Transportation Planning Region are exploring options to reconsider the priority of
this project within the Plan.
SH 82 Entrance to Aspen
Several citizens inquired about the completion of the SH 82 entrance to Aspen. The first element of the
Entrance, a roundabout at Castle Circle and Maroon Circle, has been completed and they are in favor of
the new design. They would like to see the improvements to the entrance completed to alleviate
congestion issues and make it a safer intersection for not only automobiles, but transit, pedestrians and
4
----♦
140 Appendix
The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plon: Investing in Colorado's Future _---•
bicyclists as well. A concern was received regarding the impact to the Marolt Park. Also mentioned in the
comments was the need for more buses and park-and-ride spaces.
Responses: The SH 82 entrance to Aspen is included in the Unfunded Long-Range Demand Project
Appendix. An Environmental Impact Study was completed on the project. This study included
several mitigation features to protect Marolt-Thomas Open Space.
US 36
Several citizens in Boulder, Colorado have stated they are not in favor of widening in this corridor and
they a desire for commuter rail in this corridor. Citizens would like to see a noise abatement on the
southern end of Boulder between Baseline and Table Mesa Drive.
Response:A study is being conducted along the US 36 corridor to determine transportation alternatives
for alleviating congestion. Noise abatement is not listed in the draft 2020 Statewide Transportation
Plan nor is it in the regional transportation plan. The Denver Regional Council of Governments is
currently developing their 2025 Regional Transportation Plan and this issue can be addressed in
their update process
Quebec Street
The Unfunded Long-Range Demand Project Appendix shows a Quebec Expansion Project from
Leetsdale to 23r1 Avenue. Citizens in this Denver neighborhood are concerned about environmental
impacts the expansion will create to this area.
Response: This is a local project that is sponsored by the City and County of Denver. They are aware of
the citizens' concerns and are working with them to develop solutions.
Several other comments were received from individual citizens and responded to individually. A summary
of all comments was developed and presented the Statewide Transportation Advisory Committee (STAC)
on August 31, 2000. The STAC is comprised of representatives from each of the Transportation Planning
Regions. A summary was provided to the Colorado Transportation Commission and will be discussed at a
workshop held on October 18, 2000. The document will be edited and re-released for additional public
review and comment during the week of October 23, 2000. At the close of this public review period.
comments received will be summarized and included in the final plan.
Appendix 141
♦ The 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan: Investing in Colorado's Future _--�
Appendix G - Project and Programs
142 Appendix
REVISED Identified Unfunded Corridor Projects by investment Category
Based on Approved Changes
(Dollars in 000's)
I
Total
Total Constrained Unfunded Needs
Corridor 2000 Cost 2000 Cost System Quality Safety Mobility Program Delivery,
9 58,959 125,877 4,098 2,635 119,144
24 76,724 140,523 932 59,603 79,988
25N 477,276 799,777 9,172 790,605
25S 2,604,847 677,635 65,345 24,716 587,574
34E 23,207 46,111 7,062 39,049
34W 9,782 90,690 4,576 86,114
36 168,872 434,564 434,564
40 85,117 439,829 28,306 10,466 401,057
50E 65,311 325,983 52,700 31,093 242,190
50W 66,423 165,244 308 28,195 135,645 1,096
67 11,436 73,358 13,175 60,078 105
70E 714,551 631,886 71,158 560,728
70W 1,895,575 10,672,658 17,687 1,127,045 9,527,926
71 1,818 78,544 77,284 1,260
76 214,632 396,780 222,074 82,924 91,782
82 113,236 160,607 26,029 44,408 90,170
85N 41,476 133,852 2,039 24,131 107,682
85S 140,960 38,998 38,998
121 225,694 948,758 948,758
131 27,697 444,843 9,245 88,410 347,188
160E 3,876 27,576 27,576
160W 157,172 211,982 23,664 73,296 115,022
225 110,162 365,316 365,316
270 79,050 -
285 96,176 124,003 39,472 84,531
287N 228,910 323,997 22,000 2,432 299,565
287S 116,524 62,713 13,702 49,011
385 13,930 50,455 34,782 15,673
470C 166,070 46,618 46,618
470F 177,578 39,135 39,135
1550 37,6201 180,501 8,0541 36,997 135,450
Front Range Toll Road 105 527,000 527,000
INorthwest Parkway 1 1 463,3921 1 1 4 3,392
'Powers slvo 180.752 12,621,255 5,522,5901,209,6301 5,887,1361 1,899 22.180.7521
Unprogrammea S8-t $ 1,405,1651 1 I 1
, Tnfa 15 12.002 928 31 870.460 6,131,775, 3,071,95J 22.663.627 3,100
Page 1 of 1
10/25/00 3:28 PM Investment(7th Pot Funded)
REVISED Identified Unfunded Corridor Projects by Mode
Based on Approved Changes
(Dollars in 000's)
Total
Total Constrained Unfunded Needs Highways Private Pedestrian
Corridor 2000 Cost 2000 Cost (inc.TDM&ITS" Highways Aviation _ Rail Transit Bicycle
9 58,959 125,877 125,877
76,724 140,523 , I 137043 243,162 318
25N 477,276 799,777 269,583 521,435 8,759
25S 2,604,847 677,635 364,298 257,176 56,161
34E 23,207 46,111 46,111
34W 9,782 90,690 82,228 8,146 316
36 168,872 434,564 434,564
40 85,117 439,829 41,512 394,196 4,016 105
50E 65,311 325,983 323,181 1,054 1,643 105
SOW 66,423 165,244 165,202 42
67 11,436 73,358 15,388 52,700 5,270
70E 714,551 631,886 71,158 560,728
70W 1,895,575 10,672,658 1,431,726 8.903,652 337,280
71 1,818 78,544 78,544
76 214,632 396,780 396,780
82 113,236 160,607 160,291 316
85N 41,476 133,852 78,261 55,591
85S 140,960 38,998 38,998
121 225,694 948,758 11,752 937,006
131 27.697 444,843 98,077 346,766
160E 3,876 27,576 27,576
160W 157,172 211,982 211,655 105 222
225 110,162 365,316 49,116 316,200
270 79,050 -
285 96,176 124,003 15,441 108,562
287N 228,910 323,997 50,393 273,604
287S 116,524 62,713 62,713
385 13,930 50,455 50,455
470C 166,070 46,618 46,618
470E 177,578 39,135 39,135 _
1F50ro`.Range
,e_ 37,1051 127,001 180,501 0I I
llFront Range Toll Road 1Q5 527,000 527,000 1
Northwest rdncway I I 463,3921 463,39[1 I 1
rowels Blvd 206,245
if-
22.180,7521 12.621.2551 8.421,5111 190.529 3.5621 3.045.125 960,528,
Unprogrammed SB 1 $ 1 1,405,165 i_
Totals I 32,002,928 31,87Q,460 13,486,6901 999,392, 190,529, 10,480,646, 5,760.293, 961,910
Paget C11
10/25/00 3:28 PM Mode(7th Pot Funded)
Constrained Strategic Projects Identified in TRANS
AND
Unfunded Demand Identified in 2020 Plan that are in Strategic Corridors but are beyond the scope of TRANS
Constrained Amount Unfunded A nount
Funded Strategic Projects Identified in TRANS Unfunded Demand Beyond the Scope of TRANS
(Dollars in 000's) (Dollars in boo's)
Strategic Project(SP4026) I••70 DIA to Eagle Cc $283,8061-70 Mountain MIS($500 Million Referenced it Undete,mined
Airport DRCOG Plan)
Strategic Project(SP4026) I-70 DIA to Eagle Cc $782,508 I-T0 Mountain MIS Rail Eisenhower Tunnel to $7.4,03
Airport Jefferson County Line
Gold Line LRT Corridor-Golden to DUT $3. 7,23
F.xed Guideway, DIA to Eagle County Airport $8,13 1,502
(Reduced to reflect overlap of DR 431
1-70_. est Total , • • $1,066,314
#a.2oo,
Strategic Project(SP4008)t-70 East,Tower Road to K $49,657 I-TO-Arriba to Flager $2 ',008
1-70-Bethune to Burlington $:: ,641
1-70-Genoa to Arriba $:' ',509
1-70 fast Total - $49,657 $71,1
S A(SP4001)1-25/US 50EH 47 Interohar $0 I-25/US 50/SH 47-1-25/29th Street Phase V • $21
Strategic Project(SP4027)1-25 South Corridor $105,112 1-25 MIS Placeholder Undete.
1-25 MIS -El Paso County Line to Castle Rock $' '0,1
1-25$outh•TosI S105t112 • $12001
Strategic Project(SP4028)I-25 North Corridor $287,2681-25 N. Bus/HOV -70th Avenue to 168th Avenue $1 -6,50 -
N. Front Range Unidentified-Denver to N.Adams $ 6,94
Co-
a251Noritilrotai ,r $287268 US 550-New Mexico State Litre to US 180. .T.$223,448^
Stiiiregic Project(SP4015)US 550,New Mexico b Du $28,134 US 550-New Mexico State tine to US 160, $76,41
Slxat 0ic Project(SP4013)US 160,Wolf Creek Pass $64,209 US 160-Wolf Creek Pass Segment 11
Sti is Project(SP4016)US 160,SH 3 to Florida Rh 47161 US 160-SH 172 to East of Florida River
Strategic Project(SP4021)SH 82, Basalt to Aspen $104,220 SH 82-Butter milk to Aspen(Entranc€ to Aspen) $33,6E2
SH 82-Maroon Creek Bridge $422
SH$2 Total `.:.. �,.- :< t;,,tm<•. ;144,220 •• • • :;'539„�
10/25100 3:35 PM
Page 1 of 2 TRANS2-(3 Projects constrained
Constrained Strategic Projects Identified in TRANS
AND
Unfunded Demand Identified in 2020 Plan that are in Strategic Corridors but are beyond the scope of TRANS
Constrained Amount Unfunded Ar Iount
Funded Strategic Projects Identified in TRANS Unfunded Demand Beyond the Scope cf TRANS
(Dollars in 000's) (Dollars in r)0's)
S - • t(SP4017)C-470 Extension RC-470-US 6 to 1-70 _ $5,354
Strategic Project(SP4012)US 287,Hugo to Kiowa Cni $53,954 US 287-Replace Bridge and Reconstruct from $' 1,594
Goblers Knob North
Strategic Project(SP4012)US 287,Campo to Hugo $62,570 US 287-Construct Lamar Truck Bypass $?-3,363
US 287-Eads to Wiley Junction Jndeter.nined;
US 287- Ports to Plains ROW Preservation Jndeter,rnned
US 40-SH 94 to County Road 9 $'2,648
US*/7 Total $116,524 _ seo,663
Strategic Project(SP4011)US 285,Goddard Ranch to $30,222,US 285-Fairplay to Jefferson
GRAND TOTAL-Constrained $1,898,821 GRAND TOTAL-Unfunded $9,8:3_632
10/25/00 3:35 PM
Page 2 of 2 TRANS2-(3 Projects constrained
6 freeway-freeway interchanges-various
0 DR 323 210b locations _ 387819 Safety ,Highway
7 arterial-freeway Interchanges-yarinric
O DR 324 210b locations 70513 Safety Highway
0 DR 442'350 Bicycle and Pedestrian 718828 Mobility Pedestrian
ColoSpg/Divide/CrippleCreekNictor Passenger
2 CF 5094 330 Rail 67 5270O Mobility Rail
Commuter Rail Service(Ft Collins-Greeley-
4 NF 307 330 Loveland) 25N 214721 Mobility Rail
3 IM 3 330 Commuter rail,Vail to Glenwood Springs 70W 224502 Mobility Rail
2 PB 3 312 Construct existing SH 47 to become US-50 east 50E 52700 Mobility Highway
East/Alameda Ave.LRT Cor.-Denver CBD to
6 DR 427 342 Buckley Road 70E 498542 Mobility Transit
Fixed Guideway, DIA to Eagle County Airport
1 IM 249 330a (Reduced by DR 431 $$) 70W 8139502 Mobility Rail
6 DR 428 342 Gold Line LRT Corridor-Golden to OUT 70W 337280 Mobility Transit
0 DR 438 101 Highway O&M/Operations 2108000 System Quality Highway
0 DR 437 311 Highway Recon 1581000 Mobility Highway
6 DR 424 342 I-225/LRT Corridor-Parker Road to 1-70 225 316200 Mobility Transit
2 PB 74 311 1-25-through Urbanized Pueblo Phase II 25S 150165 Mobility Highway
6 DR 420 312 1-25 N.Bus/HOV-70th Avenue to 168th Avenue 25N 146506 Mobility Highway
3 IM 147 210a 1-70-Vail Village Undergrounding 1-70 70W 1054000 Safety Highway
1-70 Mt.Rail Corridor- Eisenhower Tunnel to
1 DR 431 330a Jefferson 70W 724098 Mobility Rail
I-70/Denver Union Terminal(DUT)-in addition to
0 DR 432 340c RTP A 70E 62186 Mobility Transit
1-76-Adams/Weld C Lto Morgan/Wash
4 OF 114 111b Clconcrete Phase II 76 115620 System Quality Highway
6 DR 295 311 1-76- 1-270 to Vasquez Boulevard 76 91782 Mobility Highway_
6 DR 317 210b 1-76 at 1-270 76 64642 Safety Highway
0 DR 439 380 ITS/Signal/Operational 149668 Mobility ITS
N.Front Ramie LRT Cor. -N.of Denver CBD to
6 DR 429 330a Weld Coun 25N 306714 Mobility Rail
_il
N.Front Range Unidentified-Denver to N.
0 DR 434 391 Adams Co. Li 25N 76942 Mobility Highway
North I-25 intercnangeiFuebio t3ouievard
2 PB 2 312 Extension 955 52700 Mobility Highway
Northwest Parkway -64th Avenue to SH-93/Sh-
6 DR 352 312 128 470W 88262 Mobility Highway
Northwest parkway S'- 93./S1.12F!to 96th
6 DR 353 312 Street 470W 54998 Mobility Highway
„'»f b'-r fki.-., rty . , et- E .',14.;' t4::::: ? 7 ,...., . i .. ..i au--F ';',. ,ie '' .' +,F^ t!u,:e, i .i 1.e;,? . t -,.,t,7
6,DR 306312 Northwest Parkway at SH-93/SH-128 470W 64642 Mobility Highway
Northwest US-36 Corridor(1)-Table Mesa Drive
4 DR 421'31.2 to SH-1 36 326740 Mobility Highway
Northwest US-36 Corridor(2)-SH-121/120th to
6 DR 422'312 Sheridan 36 73780 Mobility Highway
Passenger Rail, Eagle County to Steamboat
31M 126 330 Springs 131 70618 Mobility Rail
Phase I Expansion of Transit Services(2003-
4 NF 230 340d 2020)-Oper 287N 93809 Mobility Transit
Phase II Expansion of Transit Services(2009-
4 NF 232 340d 2020)-Oper 287N 69338 Mobility Transit
S. Front Range Rail Cor.-Not Known to El Paso
1DR 430 330a County 25S 251906 Mobility Rail
S. 1-25 MIS Unidentified- El Paso County Line to
0 DR 435 391 Casa 25S 120156 Mobility Highway
3 NW 210 340d Scenario C-Operating 115517 Mobility Transit
5 SL 5136 111 SH 114-Saguache County 158100 System Quality Highway
3 IM 185 312 SH 82- 1-70 to 23rd Street 82 73780 Mobility Highway
1 IM 79 311 SH 9-Ute Pass Road to Grand County Line 9 52700 Mobility Highway
SH-121/Wadsworth Blv.LRT Cor.-Bowles
6 DR 426 342 Avenue to US-36 121 937006 Mobility Transit
0 SP 68 320 Statewide Aviation Needs Unfunded 190529 Mobility Aviation
Statewide CDOT Maintenance Program(Unmet
0 SP 84 100 Need) 213334 System Quality Highway
Statewide CDOT Surface Treatment Pool(Unmet
0 SP 85 101 Need) 300000 System Quality Highway
Steamboat Springs to Vail/Aspen-Passenger
3 NW 79 330a Rail(Reduced by IM126$$) 131 276148 Mobility Rail
Steamboat Springs to Winter Park(Passenger
3 NW 77 330a Rail) 40 286688 Mobility Rail
3.NW 76 330a Steamboat Springs to YVRA(Passenger Rail) 40 70618 Mobility Rail
Superslab- New intermodal facility SO Cob
2 CF 5068 392 Spgs SS 527000 Mobility Highway
5 GV 61 340e Three potential gondola connections-capital 64083 Mobility ,Transit
0 DR 443 140c Transit O&M 2391526 System Quality Transit
5 SW 94 340d Transit Scenario C- Operating Funds 155415 Mobility Transit
US 160-Bypass Through Alamosa Project
5 SL 5096 312 Phase 1 160W 73674 Mobility Highway
US 34 alternate highway construction (I-25 to O
4 NF 187 312 St) 34W 53950 Mobility Highway
2 CI- 5027 3i2 u5 s0-Canon City Bypass Construction 50W 52700 Mobility Highway
US 50-City of Pueblo to Pueblo County Line
2.PB 78 111 Improvemen 50E 52700 System Quality Highway
2 SE 4 311 US 50-Four-lane U.S. 50 from LaJunta to Lamar 50E 86955 Mobility Highway
US 50-Four-lane U.S. 50 from Pueblo to
2 SE 123 311 LaJunta 50E 66907 Mobility Highway
5'.SW 49 311 US 550- New Mexico to US 160-capacity 550 76415 Mobility Highway
5 G 16 311 US 550- Ouray to Ridgway 550 52700 Mobility 'Highway
2'PP 200 312 'US-24 -Bypass of Woodland Park 24 52700.Mobility I H ihway
US-285/Hampden Ave. LRT Corridor-
6;DR 425 342 Wadsworth Blvd.to S 285 108562 Mobility Transit
6 DR 301 312 US-6(NW Parkway)at SH-58 64642 Mobility Highway
3 IM 156 330a Vail, In town fixed-guideway system 70W 68510 Mobility 'Rail
Hello