HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Transportation Advisory Board 2015-10-21 A
EP
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Transportation Advisory Board Agenda
October 2e,2015 Current Members: Bryon Holmes(03/31/16)
12:00 PM—2:00 PM Stan Black(03/31/17) Belle Morris (03/31/17)
Rooms 202 & 203 Kimberly Campbell(03/31/18) Gregg Rounds(03/31/18)
Estes Park Town Hall Ann Finley(03/31/17) Thom Widawski(03/31/16)
170 MacGregor Ave Amy Hamrick(03/31/16) Vacancy(03/31/18)
Public Comment
Approval of September meeting minutes Chair Kimberly Campbell
Shuttle Committee Update Sandy Osterman
Town Projects update Director Greg Muhonen
Town Engineer Kevin Ash
Parking Strategy Chair Kimberly Campbell
• Review Draft
• Draft Approval
Other Business
Adjourn
The mission of the Town of Estes Park Transportation Advisory Board is to advise the Board of Trustees
and the Public Works staff on Local and Regional Comprehensive Transportation Planning Policies;
Maintenance, Operation and Expansion Programs; and Transportation Capital Projects.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, September 16th, 2015
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Transportation Advisory Board of the Town of
Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Rooms 202 & 203 of Town
Hall, in said Town of Estes Park on the 16th day of September, 2015.
Present: Kimberly Campbell
Gregg Rounds
Stan Black
Thom Widawski
Amy Hamrick
Belle Morris
Also Present:Greg Muhonen, Director of Public Works
John Ericson, Town Board Liaison
Kevin Ash, Town Engineer
Jen Imber, Public Works Administrative Assistant
Absent: Bryon Holmes
Ann Finley
Vacancy
Chair Campbell called the meeting to order at 12:03 p.m.
GENERAL DISCUSSION
No public was in attendance, so public comment was not heard.
The vacant TAB position is being advertised by Human Resources; currently no
applications have been received. Trustee Ericson encouraged the board to seek out
potential candidates and persuade them to apply.
Chair Campbell asked for nominations for the Co-chair position left vacant by Cory
Labianca's departure. It was moved and seconded (Morris/Hamrick) to nominate Belle
Morris as Co-chair, with all voting in favor.
Minutes from the July 15th and August 19th meeting were reviewed by members. It was
moved and seconded (Hamrick/Rounds) to approve all aforementioned minutes with a
minor amendment, with the motion passing unanimously.
On behalf of Ann Finley, who was absent from the meeting, Amy Hamerick passed
along a website, www.vtpi.org, which contains very interesting and valuable information
about downtown parking concepts and solutions. TAB members were encouraged to
check out the site in their free time.
No shuttle committee update was provided.
STAFF UPDATES ON TOWN PROJECTS
A downtown parking structure was asked to be included as a third option in the EA for
the Loop project. Key assumptions were analyzed and it was determined the alternative
would not alleviate intersection traffic as effectively as the one-way couplet. The
alternative will not be supported by CDOT & CFL. The official response regarding the
request is anticipated to be received in mid-September. The EA will move forward with
the replacement of the Ivy Street bridge sufficient to sustain a 100 year flood, with the
future option of being renovated or expanded when other bridges are replaced.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Transportation Advisory Board — September 16th, 2015 — Page 2
The Town received the draft EA regarding the parking structure from the Bureau of
Reclamation. The Town cannot advance to formal design until the EA is complete,
including a 30 day public comment period. The FTA will then consider authorizing the
move to final design stage. A preliminary design meeting will take place with CDOT this
week.
Civil Engineer Ash reported that a new pavement manager was hired and started this
month. Kelly Stallworth will be responsible for projects funded by 1A money.
Public Works made a presentation on the Fall River Trail Extension to the Town Board
at the Study Session on August 25th. The Town Board directed staff to move forward
with final design using the Fish Hatchery alignment of the trail. Final design is scheduled
to be completed by May 2016, which gives the Town time to find additional grant money
to fund construction.
A new bid package is being put in place for the Dry Gulch Road Rehab project, focusing
on the Sombrero area and trail this fall, with paving to begin in May or June of 2016.
Staff is hoping to advertise for bids very soon.
DOWNTOWN PARKING STRATEGY
Chair Campbell provided a proposed parking strategy framework for discussion. The
board discussed prioritizing the key points of the strategy. The key points were also
revised and reworded to fine-tune the strategy content. Chair Campbell will use these
key points to flesh out the parking policy and is hoping to present a draft for discussion
and vote at the October meeting. Her goal is to send out one or two sections each week
for review by TAB members.
With no other business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 1:15 p.m.
A
EP
TOWN OF ESTES P
PUBLIC WORKS
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Kimberly Campbell on behalf of the Transportation Advisory Committee
Date: TBD
RE: Proposed Parking Strategy
The Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) has developed the attached Proposed Parking Strategy in an effort
to identify priorities,to identify appropriate grant opportunities, and guide decision-making as it relates to
downtown parking initiatives.
The report outlines a set of strategies which if followed are intended to ensure that future downtown parking
initiatives will achieve preferred objectives. Many of these key points are highly interrelated and
implementation must be coordinated to ensure an optimal outcome.
If the Trustees find the strategies in this report agreeable,we ask that the Town adopt the Proposed Parking
Strategy to guide future planning.
PROPOSED
PARKING STRATEGY
Prepared by the Transportation Advisory Board
Presented to the Town of Estes Park
October 2015
INTRODUCTION
There is a strong public sentiment that Estes Park needs additional parking downtown.A new lot providing
roughly 100 net new spaces is currently planned for the Visitor Center South lot with the potential to expand
to roughly 310 net new spaces.This location is expected to ease pressure on the downtown parking supply,
but not satisfy the need for additional parking.
It is difficult to quantify how much additional parking is needed to adequately accommodate the locals and
visitors desiring to park downtown during the peak summer season.What is known is that each time a
vehicle is unable to find parking downtown, local businesses lose a revenue opportunity and the Town misses
out on potential tax receipts.
While there are no simple parking solutions, a few key points will be valuable in guiding future parking
solutions.The following strategy was developed through months of collaborative conversations and research
by the Transportation Advisory Board. We believe these strategies will keep decision-makers focused on
what is important downtown—the visitor experience. If we can maintain our focus on the visitor, and not
over-emphasize the vehicles themselves,we will be able to find a solution to our congestion and parking
shortage without jeopardizing the character of our Town.
While the Transportation Advisory Board collectively stands behind these recommendations, it was difficult
to develop a strategy on which we could agree. Divergent views brought divergent solutions.All had merit.
The strategies proposed here were thought to balance these divergent views and highlighted the best
solutions. Implementation of these strategies will still be challenging. In particular,the topic of the best
location for a parking structure downtown is likely to elicit strong and divergent opinions.
BACKGROUND
Over the years,the Town of Estes Park has commissioned a variety of transportation studies. Some of these
specifically studied the downtown parking inventory and its utilization. Below is a summary of the key
findings of the most recent reports:
Estes Valley Transportation Alternatives Study: In 2003,the Estes Valley Transportation Alternatives
Study(April 2003)was conducted to "develop a well-balanced, multi-modal transportation system
that addresses existing deficiencies and accommodates future travel needs for the Estes Valley in a
11 Jage
safe and efficient manner." (page E-1). One aspect of the study was an analysis of the utilization of
existing downtown parking spaces.
According to this study,the Town is projected to need 545 additional parking spaces by 2020(page
ES-3 and page 59)to accommodate demands from an increase in tourists visiting Estes Park and
RMNP, as well as a growing Estes Valley population and continued commercial development.The
report anticipates that current over-capacity parking conditions could increase from 25 days per year
(in 2003)to 75 days per year in 2020(page ES-3). Key parking recommendations from this study
were fixed route transit routes through town with increased intercept parking east of downtown.
Table 1: Rocky Mountain National Park attendance
Year Actual RMNP Attendance Projected Attendance from Estes Valley
Transportation Alternatives Study
2000 3,185,392 3,379,800
2005 2,798,368 3,732,600
2010 2,955,821 4,173,800
2015 3,434,751 in 2014 4,731,900
2020 TBD 5,446,600
Source:Estes Valley Transportation Alternatives Study,Table 8(page 49)and
https://firma.nps.gov/Stats/SSRSReports/Park%20Specific%20Reports/An nua I%20Pa rk%20Recreation%20Visitation%2
0(1904%20-%20Last%20Calendar%20Year)?Park=ROMO
While today we can see that while this study over-projected visitor growth in the National Park, it
appears correct that overcapacity-parking conditions continue to grow.
2005 Republic Parking Study: In 2005,the Town commissioned the Republic Parking Study. Republic
Parking conducted a comprehensive analysis of the parking supply and utilization.Their
recommendations(page 193) included improved signage,visitor and employee shuttles, alternate
employee parking and some unique options such as golf cart shuttles and valet options. What was
missing was a recommendation for a significant expansion of downtown parking capacity.Their
analysis questioned whether a structure would be cost effective,given the high construction and
maintenance costs and seasonal usage.
Roadmap to the Future: In April 2012,the Transportation Visioning Committee presented its report
to the Town Trustees outlining its vision for Estes Park's transportation system 20 years in the future.
Its recommendations were categorize into five areas:
1. Information distribution
2. Shuttles& Public Transportation
3. Parking
4. Road Configuration
5. Multi-modal Transportation
The TVC then broke out its recommendations into short-term, mid-term,and long-term
recommendations.
Estes Park Transit& Parking Study:This study was initiated to evaluate transit and parking
enhancements that could be implemented to improve the visitor and resident travel experience
during the peak summer season.The study reviewed transit and parking operations in the peer
, age 2 1 19
communities of Aspen, Durango, Breckenridge and Springdale, UT.The study evaluated current
deficiencies with the Town's parking and shuttles, and recommended additional transit parking and
revised transit routes.
2015 Downtown Parking Survey: in May 2015, an informal survey of Estes Valley residents was
created by Charley Dickey& Paul Fishman of the Downtown Parking Task Force, a citizen group,to
determine the public sentiment toward the current parking situation and to determine preferred
parking solutions. This survey was distributed by email and Facebook.While not scientific in its
approach, it did get over 800 participants and remains a valuable indicator of current public
sentiment.
Data from these reports was reviewed and discussed by the Transportation Advisory Board in their efforts to
create this parking strategy.
Guiding Principles
When developing any transportation or parking improvement,we encourage the Town Trustees to keep in
mind the following guiding principles:
o Protect the natural environment:
o Be future-oriented when planning developments along waterways.These cannot be
returned to their natural state. Keep these areas accessible to people, not vehicles.
o Encourage alternate modes of transportation. Provide wide sidewalks, bike lanes, shuttles.
o Balance the desire to park downtown by protecting the family friendly downtown zone and
its natural amenities.
o Design downtown to be a fun,family friendly destination, not simply a connector to RMNP. Create
an attractive,welcoming environment that invites guests to wander,sit, play,eat, shop relax and
enjoy being here. Emphasize the pedestrian experience. Maintain green spaces, riverfront plazas and
create strong pedestrian and cyclist connectivity.
o Build in harmony with nature: make parking areas architecturally attractive and consistent with
nature and existing structures. Highlight the natural beauty of the area.
o Do not allow vehicles to become the driving characteristic of downtown Estes Park
Objectives
They key objectives we want to accomplish with this parking strategy are:
• To make downtown more accessible, inviting and attractive to our residents and visitors. Make it
easy to get here,stay here and play here
• To reduce congestion&pollution by reducing unnecessary vehicle circulation
• To keep it simple. First time visitors should easily find parking, shops, and attractions.
Proposed Parking Strategy
There are ten key points to our proposed downtown parking strategy:
1. Strategically increase the parking supply
a. Build new inventory in downtown or perimeter locations, not remote locations
Page 3 1 19
b. Mitigate congestion with strategically placed parking
c. Enhance shuttle utilization by integrating shuttle stops
d. Consider future development opportunities
2. Simplify parking
3. Provide exceptional directional signage
4. Reduce parking demand through alternate modes
5. Implement a pay-to-park program
6. Ensure a sufficient supply of disabled parking spaces
7. Encourage business owners&employees to park remotely
8. Redirect oversized vehicles to remote parking areas
9. Protect downtown adjacent neighborhoods
10. Develop a special event management plan
The report that follows will discuss each of these components in detail.
Strategy 1: Strategically increase the parking supply
The need for additional parking inventory downtown is evident during the summer and fall seasons by the
number of cars circling the parking lots and downtown streets looking for empty spaces and the cars parked
as far away as Wonderview Avenue. With a small downtown area surrounded by mountains that inhibit
expansion and a main thoroughfare that runs right through the middle, it is challenging to determine the
correct location for additional parking.The location of any new parking inventory will have a significant
impact on traffic congestion, pedestrian right-of-ways,future development activities,and downtown
aesthetics.
The criteria below should be central to any determination of future parking locations:
a. Build new inventory in downtown or perimeter locations, not remote locations
b. Mitigate congestion with strategically placed parking
c. Enhance shuttle utilization by integrating shuttle stops
d. Consider future development opportunities
We will discuss each criteria below.
a. Build new inventory in downtown or perimeter locations:
While the Town shuttles remain a valued amenity, it is challenging to overcome the American desire to
park near their desired end-destination.As such, public sentiment appears to prefer downtown parking
spaces. When evaluating prospective parking lot locations,we looked at three parking zones: 1)
downtown, 2) perimeter(aka downtown adjacent), and 3) remote(locations that require shuttle service
to downtown).
When selecting a location for future parking expansion,we recommend that additional spaces be built in
a "downtown" or"perimeter" location. Remote parking,as evidenced by the usage of the fairgrounds
parking lot and the results of the 2015 Downtown Parking Survey, is not a preferred location for new
parking inventory.
4 I 19
Due to the limited availability of land on which a new surface lot could be built in or near downtown, we
have focused our analysis on those existing downtown and perimeter parking lots or parcels of land that
are large enough to support the construction of a moderate sized parking structure.
Page 5 1 19
Table 2: Potential parking structure locations and capacities
Lot Name Estimated #Spaces in Estimated#Spaces Location
Structure Size existing lot in 3-story structure
Visitor Center South Lot 125'x 255' 102 208-levels 1-2, up to Perimeter
(in progress) 412 with 4 levels
Town Hall—North portion 125'x 455' 281 577 Downtown
Town Hall—South/Library lot 142'x 255' combined 311 Downtown
Riverside Lot 125'x 275' 91 335 Downtown
Post Office Lot 125'x 350' 93 431 Downtown
Weist(rectangular portion 116'x 241' 141 309 Downtown
along Moraine Ave.)
Piccadilly Square _ 125'x 275' _ n/a 311 Perimeter
Visitor Center North 125'x 218' 154 285 Perimeter
*Existing space counts from Estes Valley Transit&Parking Study(Dec 2013),structure size&capacity estimates based off Visitor
Center South Lot capacities
Current public sentiment appears to prefer a parking structure at the Post Office Parking lot.
Interestingly,the 2005 Republic Parking Study found that preferred parking structure locations were
the Weist Lot and the Municipal lot.The key point is that the preferred location of the structure
changes with the times, but the perception that Estes Park needs additional parking continues to
thrive.
Table 3: Public preference for downtown parking lot
2015 Estes Park Downtown 2005 Republic Parking Study
Parking Survey
Question 5:Where would you like to "What do you feel needs to be
see more parking? done to improve the parking?"
Survey participants could select multiple 36%of business owners surveyed
options. felt a parking garage was the best
solution.*
Location %Support %Support
Post Office Parking Lot 52% 2.04%
Additional Levels at
Visitor Center South lot 49%
Municipal Lot/Library 10.2%
Lot 28/
Weist Parking lot 28% 10.2%
Additional Levels at
Fairgrounds parking lot 28%
Cleave Street lot 4.08%
*Page 83 of the 2005 Republic Parking Study
There appears to be support for expanding the Visitor Center South Parking Structure to four levels
before pursuing additional parking downtown. Once that structure has been open for a while and
' age 6119
utilization has caught on, conduct a new downtown parking utilization study to determine the need
for additional parking inventory.
b. Mitigate congestion with strategically placed parking
Estes Park is a small mountain community with a significant seasonal influx of visitor traffic that
strains its infrastructure.This inflow of vehicles come from three primary traffic flows:
o Inbound traffic from Highway 36:This traffic has the opportunity to park at the planned
Visitor Center South lot and thus are a lower priority.
o Inbound traffic from Highway 34:This flow's first significant parking source is the Town Hall
Lot,which fills quickly.
o Outbound traffic from Rocky Mountain National Park:this flow largely occurs in the
afternoon. Outbound visitors from the National Park often seek food, refreshment, shopping
and relaxation and need a convenient, easy to find parking location.
Any new parking inventory should take into consideration the ability of the parking lot to mitigate
congestion along one or more of these flows of traffic through downtown Estes Park. Ingress and
egress patterns should be evaluated for each proposed location.
The attractiveness of a particular destination may vary depending whether the Town proceeds with
the Downtown Loop project and its modified traffic flow or not. For instance, if a parking structure
were built at the Post Office lot,with ingress and egress located on Ivy Street,visitors wanting to
head to the National Park,the YMCA or Mary's Lake Road will have to circle around 3/ of the
downtown loop to be headed in the correct direction.This solution will contribute to downtown
congestion. In contrast, if the structure were located outside the loop, such as the Town Hall lot or
Piccadilly Square,visitors exiting the lot would be able to turn either direction and would only enter
the "loop" if it were necessary. When trying to mitigate congestion on our constrained roadways,
each car counts.
C. Enhance shuttle utilization by integrating shuttle stops
A new parking structure should have integrated shuttle stops, allowing visitors to leave their cars all
day and use shuttles to get around as desired. Placing the parking structure on a shuttle route with a
specially designed shuttle stop will provide the Town, and potentially Rocky Mountain National Park,
with opportunities to enhance the shuttle system as needed to meet the transportation needs of the
community.
d. Consider future development opportunities
The Town of Estes Park continues to evolve. It is inevitable. Downtown could thrive and grow, or
shrink and become more intimate. We cannot predict the future. But once a parking structure is
built, it cannot be moved. Expect it to be there forever.
With that in mind,the location of a future parking structure is significant. Do we really want to use
prime riverfront land for a parking structure?Would a particular location be better as retail, or
plaza? Should parking be right in the middle or on the edges?
It is nearly impossible to get consensus as to where the best location for a parking structure might
be.Think about land use when making this decision.Think about whether this location enhances the
visitor experience, or hinders it.
Page 71 19
Strategy 2: Simplify parking
Estes Park's parking can be difficult for visitors. It is broken down into more than 12 downtown parking lots
and on high traffic days,visitors often find themselves driving around aimlessly searching for a lot with a
vacant space.A simplification of the parking inventory into fewer, larger parking destinations with good
signage will benefit all visitors.
As such, any new parking inventory should be moderate to significant in volume. Small lots fill quickly and
encourage drivers to circulate through downtown seeking available spaces.A parking strategy focused on a
few centralized locations can facilitate getting the majority of vehicles into available spaces efficiently and
with a less cluttered signage system.
Once the primary parking supply has been expanded,the Town should simplify the overall parking availability
downtown.This can be achieved by:
o Reduce on-street parking to reduce conflict between parked cars and congested roadways and to
allow wider sidewalks to improve visitor experience.
o Converting small parking lots to new purposes.These may include:
1. Selling for commercial development,
2. Dedicating use for special use groups (such as handicapped parking, reserved employee
parking, etc.), or
3. Converting to park or other recreational use.
o Restrict parking on residential streets to residents and their guests.
Strategy 3: Provide exceptional directional signage
The success of any downtown parking strategy lies in the ability of drivers to find available parking spaces.A
significant percentage of visitors to Estes Park are first time visitors.They do not know their way around and
rely heavily on available signage to reach their desired destination. For a visitor, it is not sufficient to find
downtown;they must then find a parking space. Particularly on high volume days,getting these visitors into
available parking spaces efficiently is integral to both reducing downtown congestion and getting visitors out
of their cars and into shops and restaurants.
A comprehensive signage strategy for downtown that incorporates both larger scale vehicular signage as well
as smaller scale pedestrian wayfinding signage is a relatively inexpensive first step to getting visitors into
parking spaces efficiently. Vehicular signage must direct visitors to downtown, Rocky Mountain National
Park, and other key public destinations(such as parking lots,golf courses,the marina,the fairgrounds and
the events center). Pedestrian wayfinding signage should highlight unique destinations within walking
distance of the sign (such as parks, plazas, historic sites).
Longer-term strategies could incorporate smart technologies that provide real-time parking space availability.
These technologies are more expensive and will likely reach only a small percentage of downtown visitors.
Signage touches all drivers and can be highly effective.
Strategy 4: Reduce parking demand through alternate modes
Building new parking structures is an expensive endeavor. For a Town like Estes Park where the need for a
parking structure is only seasonal, it is an even more challenging investment option. Rather than building
Page 8 1 19
parking for every car that desires to park downtown,the Town should encourage alternate modes of
transportation such as cycling and walking, in addition to our existing shuttle system,to reduce the overall
demand for downtown parking.
Residents and visitors to Estes Park are attracted to our beautiful landscapes and the opportunities for
outdoor activities, be they hiking, photography, animal and bird watching, rock climbing or cycling. Our
population is notably healthy and active. Many of our residents and visitors prefer to get around by foot or
bike, rather than driving. In addition, a notable number of residents and visitors reside within walking or
cycling distance of downtown Estes Park. Encouraging these groups to visit downtown by these alternate
modes of transportation, rather than driving, could reduce downtown parking demand.
Pedestrians:The existing walk/bike paths that connect to downtown and the shuttle systems are a great first
step in encouraging residents and visitors to leave the car behind when visiting downtown. Continued
expansion of the walking trails,such as a safe walking route along Moraine Avenue,would further indicate
the Town's support for pedestrian traffic in downtown.
Widening the sidewalks along Elkhorn Avenue and wider landing areas at street crossings to allow people to
gather without hindering pedestrian flow would further enhance the experience of visitors and residents.
Cyclists:Cycling is a growing sport and encompasses a range of styles, including street cycling, mountain
biking and casual family transportation.At this time, downtown Estes Park is not bike friendly. We cannot
expect residents or visitors will ride bikes into town rather than driving until we provide safe methods for
them to do so.The lack of bike lanes along main thoroughfares and pedestrian trails that do not allow cyclists
leave few routes that bikes may safely travel.The heavily congested roads in the summer season further
discourage cyclists.
• Bike routes: Either on-street bike lanes or off-street trails must be available in order for bicyclists to
safely travel in and out of downtown Estes. It is understood that bike lanes are incorporated into the
Downtown Loop project. If this project proceeds,this would be a significant first step in the
development of bike lanes along all main thoroughfares in and out of downtown. Further
continuation of bike lanes along Highways 34 and 36 into town and along Moraine Avenue would
significantly improved bicycle access to downtown.
In addition, a signage program along multi-use trails (such as the Fall River Trail) indicating that
bicycles are allowed might help visitors understand that these are safe trails for families and others
who would like to ride into town but may not be comfortable sharing the road with vehicles.
Bike racks: In order for cycling to be an effective method of transportation downtown,we must
accommodate parking for bicycles as well as vehicles. Currently,there are approximately 13 bike
racks in downtown Estes, but most hold less than ten bikes. In order to be effective, bike racks must
be centrally located,easy to find, have sufficient capacity and be located near shuttle stops or other
transportation options. (See Appendix A for a table of downtown bike racks)
Bike racks on the Town shuttles would further increase the opportunities for residents and visitors to
get around by bike.
Shuttles:The Town's shuttle system is a great service for our residents and visitors that also happens to
reduce traffic congestion and parking demand. Shuttles should remain a key component of the downtown
parking strategy and efforts to increase ridership, and therefore reduce the number of vehicles downtown,
should continue to be pursued.
, age 9 1 19
Strategy 5: Implement a pay-to-park program
The Transportation Advisory Board recommends implementing a pay-to-park program in downtown Estes
Park during high traffic periods. Paid parking downtown has the potential to:
• Influence visitor behavior—encourage more visitors to use the free shuttles
• Improve the distribution of vehicles—encourage visitors to park at the free lots a little further out,
thus removing vehicles from downtown roadways
• Provide a revenue source that could support the cost of additional parking inventory
There has been a shift in public sentiment toward paid parking in downtown Estes. In the 2015 Downtown
Parking Survey, over 50%of respondents supported paid parking in downtown Estes.
Table 4: Do you support paid parking downtown?
2015 Estes Park Downtown Parking 2005 Republic Parking Study
Survey
Yes 50.8% 40.88%
No 49.2% 59.12%
There are many technology options available to implement a pay-to-park program.Town staff is best suited
to research and recommend an appropriate technology.That said, it would be beneficial to select a newer
parking technology that has the capacity to:
• Monitor availability of individual parking spaces and provide data at lot entrance with space
availability information
• Accept credit card payments
• Communicate with the customer via smart phone:
o Location of available spaces
o Send text reminder when purchased time is nearing expiration
o Provide option to pay for additional time
• Smart enforcement:
o Notification of occupied stalls that haven't been paid or expired meters
The ideal time to implement a pay-to-park strategy would be at the start of the high traffic season following
the completion of the Visitor Center South parking structure. Prior to its completion and during its
construction, downtown Estes will not have sufficient parking supply to provide visitors with sufficient
parking alternatives. Upon completion of the Visitor Center South parking structure,there will be sufficient
inventory to allow downtown visitors to select to 1) pay to park in the central downtown area, 2) park free at
the Visitor Center South structure or 3)to take the shuttle.
Due to the seasonal nature of our downtown visitations,we recommend that pay-to-park technology be
implemented when average monthly traffic counts are expected to exceed 300,000 vehicles per month
(Highway 34 and Hwy 36 combined).This is the point at which downtown parking becomes limited. Based on
recent traffic volumes, paid parking would be in effect from May through October. [IF WE CHANGED THE
THRESHHOLD TO 400,000 CARS,THE SEASON WOULD BE JUNE TO SEPT.Current seasonal restrictions are in
place from May to September]
Page 10 119
700,000
■2010 ■2011 ■2012 ■2013 ■2014 ■2015
600,000
500,000-
400,000
300,000-
200,000 F `l ' I ' ' I I I I I
100,000 1 I I I I I I
0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Daily enforcement is recommended from 9:00 am to 7:00 pm. We recommend allowing all day parking in
most locations and removing the 3-hour time limit that currently exists.Visitors should be encouraged to stay
and enjoy downtown Estes Park for as long as they desire.A few key short term parking areas will be needed
to facilitate pickups, drop offs, etc.
Rates:We recommend a two-tiered pricing strategy.Tier 1 would be encompass most of the downtown
parking spaces.Tier 2 would be a remote parking and would be free. Below is a breakdown of the lots
included in each tier.
Tier one(paid parking):
• Town Hall/Library Parking lots
• East Riverside Lot(adjacent to Dairy Queen/Casa Grande)
• Riverside lot(at Confluence Park)
• Post Office lot
• Virginia Lot(corner of Elkhorn and Park Ave)
• Curbside parking surrounding Bond Park
• MacGregor Avenue street parking
• Brownfields lot
• Spruce lot
• Tregent lot
• Big Horn lot
• Moraine/Weist lot
• Davis lot
• West Riverside curbside and lot
Tier 2(free parking):
• Visitor Center South parking structure
• Visitor Center north lot
• Performance Park lot????
• Fairgrounds/Event Center lot
Page 11 1 19
Rates:We recommend a three-tiered pricing strategy.Tier 1 would be the most centrally located parking
spaces in town and charge the highest rates.Tier 2 would be a bit further away and be priced more
moderately.Tier 3 would be free.
Tier one would include:
• Town Hall/Library Parking lots
• East Riverside Lot(adjacent to Dairy Queen/Casa Grande)
• Riverside lot(at Confluence Park)
• Post Office lot
• Virginia Lot(corner of Elkhorn and Park Ave)
• Curbside parking surrounding Bond Park
• Brownfields lot
Tier 2 would include:
• Spruce lot
• Tregent lot
• Big Horn lot
• Moraine/Weist lot
• Davis lot
• West Riverside curbside and lot
Tier 3 (free parking) would be located at:
• Visitor Center South parking structure
• Visitor Center north lot
• MacGregor Avenue street parking [IS THIS TIER 3 OR TIER 2?]
• Performance Park lot
• Fairgrounds/Event Center lot
Revenue generated from paid parking should be spent first on costs to maintain parking lots, parking
technology and enforcement costs. Once those costs have been covered, remaining funding should be set
aside for additional parking capacity in the future????
Strategy 6: Ensure a sufficient supply of disabled parking spaces
According to Police Chief Wes Kufeld, in summer there is a need for more disabled parking in the downtown
area.This is not a surprise.With 25%of Town of Estes Park residents age 65 or older compared to 11%for
the state of Colorado as a whole (source: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/08/0825115.html), it
makes sense that we would have a higher need for disabled parking.
While data on age demographics for visitors to Rocky Mountain National Park does not appear to be available
on the National Park Service Visitor Use Statistics website (https://irma.nps.gov/Stats/Reports/Park), it is
evident that during the academic year we see fewer families and more "empty nesters".Again this skew in
traditional age demographics is likely to warrant additional disabled parking.
Page 12 119
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued new regulations under the Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA)
in 2010.The table below reflects the number of disabled spaces required relative to parking lot size. Further,
one of eight accessible parking spaces, but always at least one, must be van-accessible.
Table 5:ADA Parking Space Requirements
Total Number of Parking Spaces in Minimum Number of Accessible
Parking Facility(Lot or Garage) Parking Spaces Required
1-25 1
26-50 2
51-75 3
76- 100 4
101 - 150 5
151 -200 6
201 -300 7
301 -400 8
401 -500 9
501—1000 2%of total
1001 and over 20, plus 1 for each 100, or fraction
thereof, over 1000
While we do not know how many additional disabled parking spaces are required to meet demand, it would
make sense for to Town to increase the number in some of the larger lots around town.This would allow a
critical mass of disabled parking to be marked with signage to help visitors and residents alike to locate these
spaces.Another idea presented elsewhere in this report is to consider dedicating one or more small lots to
disabled parking once the parking inventory has been increased. Small flat lots that might be suitable for this
repurposing include the Tregent Lot(corner of Spruce Dr. and Elkhorn Ave.), East Riverside Lot(corner of
Elkhorn Ave.& East Riverside Dr. at Dairy Queen), or the Big Horn Lot(corner of Big Horn Dr. and Cleave St.)
Strategy 7: Encourage owners & employees to park remotely
With a shortage of parking in downtown, each space becomes very valuable. It is in the best interest of the
downtown merchants and the Town to fill these spaces with revenue generating visitors. But each day, a
significant number of downtown parking spaces are being filled by owners and employees of the shops,
restaurants and Town Hall.
Stan Black of the Transportation Advisory Board walked downtown and made some informal inquiries about
summer staffing levels in an effort to quantify the impact of downtown employees on parking. He found over
200 businesses with about 10%of these being restaurants or bars. Interviews with shop owners indicated
two employees typically worked per shift,with two shifts per day. For food and beverage establishments, it is
estimated that they have five employees per shift.This results in roughly 500 employees at any given time
during the day. Providing for carpooling,walking, cycling and shuttles,we estimate that 250 parking spaces
are being consumed throughout the day by downtown employees (not including Town, Library or Police
Page 13 119
employees).With 1073 downtown parking spaces and another 256 spaces at the visitor center, 19%of the
downtown parking supply is being used by employees.
The question remains what can we do to encourage employees to park elsewhere and make room for
residents and visitors? It typically comes down to incentives or deterrents. For instance,the current shuttle
system is a beneficial option available to many downtown employees. Unfortunately, it does not run early
enough in the morning or late enough into the evening to meet the needs of all employees, particularly food
service employees. If the Town were to implement a pay-to-park program,this is expected to be a significant
deterrent for many employees, but it is likely years away from implementation.The Town implemented an
incentive program for Town employees in summer 2015 encouraging them to park remotely or use alternate
methods to get to work.
The Town may need to work with the business community to create a broader set of incentives for
employees to find alternate ways to get to work. For instance,could employees get entered into a drawing
for a vacation to Hawaii each time they ride the shuttles? Or a guaranteed prize from a prize catalog if certain
thresholds are met?Would downtown merchants donate prices or make financial contributions to prize
packages?Another suggestion was to increase downtown business licensing fees, but offer a rebate (or
discount on next year's registration)to those businesses who can document that their employees are parking
elsewhere.
Any program developed will incur costs in the form of program development, education and awareness,
implementation and prizes/incentives. Measuring the results is often the hardest part of the equation (do
employees get a punch card punched by the shuttle driver? Do we staff remote parking lots with an
attendant to log employee vehicles? Do we provide RFID parking stickers on employee vehicles that record
how often they park at offsite lots?).
Hiring a consultant to develop an incentive program may be a wise investment. We don't need the situation
studied again.What is needed is a comprehensive, actionable plan to encourage employees to park outside
downtown, developed in conjunction with business owners and business associations.This needs to be a
community effort in order to be successful.
While these may seem like expensive options,the cost to do nothing is even greater.
1. Loss of revenue to downtown merchants: If each vehicle parks downtown for an average of 4 hours,
each parking space will have at least 2 cars per day. If each car purchases meals for two at$25 plus
spends$50 in downtown shops,then the downtown merchants have collectively lost$75/car x 2
cars/day x 250 parking spaces=$37,500/day x 90 days of the season =$3,375,000 in lost downtown
revenue
2. Loss of sales tax to Town: Using the above scenario of a loss in sales of$3,375,000 times the 4%tax
rate results in a loss of$135,000 in sales tax revenue to the Town.
3. Parking Structure: If we want to continue to allow employees to park downtown, we could construct
a parking structure to replace the spaces they take up.At the recent price/stall of$50,000 for
parking structure construction,this lot would cost 250 spaces x$50,000/stall =$12,500,000.
Strategy 8: Redirect oversized vehicles to remote parking
Buses, RVs and other oversized vehicles create challenges in our narrow downtown corridor. In addition to
our Town shuttles and Rocky Mountain National Park Shuttles, each day our town sees tour buses driving
Page 14 119
through on their way to the National Park or bringing their passengers for lunch and shopping downtown.
Other visitors arrive in RVs and drive through town on their way to local RV parks or the National Park.
Many of these oversized vehicles desire to park downtown. Currently,there is a total of 24 designated
Bus/RV parking spaces in Estes Park(17 in the Town Hall lot,4 at the Visitor Center lot, and 3 at the Event
Center).There are an additional 17 stalls at the Event Center lot that are extra-long, but not Bus/RV spaces
(these spaces may not have sufficient ingress/egress to accommodate buses or RVs). We need to ensure that
there are sufficient spaces to accommodate our oversized vehicle demand.These spaces should not be
downtown, but close to shuttle routes to allow passengers easy access to downtown.
The Town should also encourage RVs to avoid driving through downtown when possible.This can be
accomplished by:
• Encouraging RV parks to direct their customers to arrive/depart via alternate routes.Consider
providing specific maps or marketing tools to help them communicate these routes to their
customers.
• Specifically discuss alternate oversized vehicle routes in the transportation section of
appropriate websites, such as www.visitestespark.com or http://www.nps.gov/romo/index.htm,
and local maps.
• Identify a central location,such as the visitor center lot or fairgrounds lot,with sufficient RV
parking and mark it clearly with signage, on maps, and on local websites.
In addition,the Town should adopt a policy on tour buses.This policy should dictate where tour buses may
make drop-offs and pick-ups downtown, and where they may park while waiting for their passengers.This
policy should be proactively distributed to Colorado based tour operators who operate tours in Estes
Park/Rocky Mountain National Park.
Strategy 9: Protect Adjacent Neighborhoods
When towns implement pay-to-park program, a common unintended consequence is increased visitor
parking along residential streets where there is no fee to park.The neighborhoods surrounding Estes Park's
downtown will be particularly vulnerable if Estes Park implements a pay-to-park program.These
neighborhoods include:
• Virginia Drive area
• Big Horn Drive area
• East Riverside Drive
If the Town chooses to implement a pay-to-park program, it would benefit these neighborhoods if a proactive
approach were taken to prevent visitors from parking along their roadways. One common approach is to
require residential permits for residents and their guests and not allow public parking in these areas.
The Estes Park Police Department currently issues overnight parking permits for downtown residents.An
expansion of this permit program should be implemented simultaneous with or before any pay-to-park
program is in place. Protect the neighborhood before they experience negative impacts, not after they have
been inconvenienced.
Page 15 119
Strategy 10: Develop a Special Event Management Plan
There are a handful of days in Estes Park,where traffic congestion is exceptionally bad.These are typically
holidays or free Rocky Mountain National Park days.The most notable are the Fourth of July, Public Lands
day in September, Memorial and Labor Day weekends.A special event management plan would be helpful to
address the unique characteristics of these challenging days.
The primary characteristics of these high congestion days are:
• Heavy traffic, particularly inbound traffic from Highways 34 and 36 in the mornings
• Parking shortages
• Strong pedestrian presence
In order to address each of these issues, a strategy must be developed in advance.
• Traffic Management:To address heavy inbound traffic days,such as on a Rocky Mountain National
Park free admission day, have a plan in place with CDOT to keep signals on Elkhorn Avenue
westbound green for longer periods. Consider closing some cross streets to traffic for a couple of
hours to facilitate the Elkhorn traffic, much like is done on parade days, or lengthen the time
between green lights for these side streets on high volume days. Provide good signage on Highways
34 and 36 directing park traffic onto Wonderview as well as Elkhorn.
• Create alternate parking opportunities: Make arrangements with local landowners whose
properties could serve as overflow parking on key days. Create signage notifying the public where
parking is available. Consider asking public service groups to staff the lots and charge a parking fee as
a fundraiser. For long days, such as Fourth of July,extend shuttle service to get people back to their
cars.
Possible locations for overflow parking include: Elkhorn Lodge, Our Lady of the Mountains Catholic
Church, St Bartholomew's Episcopal Church on MacGregor Avenue, and the school district parking
lots.
• Strong Pedestrian Presence: High volume visitor days means more pedestrians downtown. Consider
closing certain crosswalks with barricades to facilitate vehicular traffic(such as the east/west
crossing at Highway 36 where an underpass is available. Use signage to direct pedestrians to the
underpass.
• Extend shuttle hours:When overflow parking is in use or on days where events such as the fireworks
show on the Fourth of July or the Rodeo or Scottish Festival keep people active long into the
evenings, continue to keep the shuttles running. Remote parking can only be successful if the last
visitor is able to return to their car easily at the end of the night.
Treating these high volume days like a special event—a SuperBowl or State Fair—needs special planning. Our
streets are not designed for the volumes they see, but with intervention,the movement of vehicles and
pedestrian can be improved. Keep traffic flowing.Get cars into parking spaces efficiently. Keep pedestrians
on the sidewalks and out of the roads. Bring the community together to help with these activities. Have all
Community Service Officers on duty. Staff parking lots with community service groups. Have an abundant
supply of shuttles available.
Page 16 119
These are busy days.These are long days.These are great days for the community to come together to make
Estes Park a great experience for our visitors.
Page 17 119
Appendix A — bike racks
The map here indicates where bicycle racks are located throughout Estes Park:
http://www.bikeestes.org/bike-racks-in-estes-park/
Visitor Center Bike racks(existing) On the right side of the visitor center(+-5 bikes)
Safeway Bike racks(existing) Right side of the building(Nice view of Stanley
Hotel)(+- 10 bikes)
Kind Coffee(side) Bike racks(existing) Left side of the building(+- 10 bikes)
Ed's Cantina Bike racks(existing) Front of building(+-6 bikes)
Library Bike racks(existing) Back of the building(+-3 bikes)
Town Hall Bike racks(existing) , Front of Town Hall,close to entrance
Performance Park Bike racks(existing) Close to bridge(+- 10 bikes)
Tregent Park Bike racks(existing) (+-3 bikes)
Moraine Avenue Restrooms Bike racks(existing)
A la carte Bike racks(existing) 2 bike racks on plaza between A la carte&White
orchid(3 bikes)
McDonald's Bike racks(existing) Between McDonald's and Parking lot(+-8 bikes)
White Orchid Bike racks(existing) 2 bike racks on plaza between A la carte&White
orchid(3 bikes)
Performance Park parking Bike racks(existing) Parking lot(+-6 bikes)
lot
Riverside Drive(behind Bike racks(existing) Behind Subway,across from the public restrooms,
Subway) close to sidewalk'
Source:http://www.bikeestes.org/bike-racks-in-estes-park/
114111111 ._ 1110
Page 18 1 19
Hwy 34 and Hwy 36 Aggregate
HWY 34 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC total yr HWY 34
2004 104,656 98,784 121,210 116,100 167,834 203,926 259,849 239,683 225,887 136,113 106,356 106,836 1,887,234 2004
2005 98,736 100,576 113,069 104,168 158,999 210,299 269,823 233,208 205,540 156,037 116,184 109,626 1,876,265 2005
2006 104,430 93,930 107,587 123,231 165,361 214,947 255,054 222,521 214,126 149,466 115,823 91,727 1,858,203 2006
2007 88,328 90,463 111,253 115,892 158,553 212,160 259,802 233,150_ 217,279 151,194 113,372 91,120 1,842,566 2007
2008 95,182 93,780 166,930 110,694 148,406 193,797 240,947 227,150 195,518 159,785 116,351 99,108 1,847,648 2008
2009 100,654 94,637 108,115 104,363 152,723 210,138 262,204 239,530 216,991 140,196 111,040 91,542 1,832,133 2009
2010 95,352 80,776 103,456 111,132 146,277 205,816 265,622 237,989 217,019 201,875 107,453 102,509 1,875,276 2010
2011 96,516 81,024 107,211 110,272 143,912 207,652 267,578 233,433 215,178 160,453 107,432 96,728 1,827,389 2011
2012 98,600 87,344 90,251 NO DATA AVAILABLE 138,086 254,989 244,621 161,125 129,417 113,198 1,317,631 2012
2013 113,208 101,101 122,025 118,784 185,452 243,421 299,179 254,738 121,784 62,293 95,788 111,806 1,829,579 2013
12014 105,150 96,635 116,196 124,521 181,001 244,668 296,473 277,720 244,880 190,869 121,649 112,677 2,112,439 2014
2015 118,754 98,187 140,795 133,294 183,838 262,889 321,995 284,905 1,544,657 2015
I HWY 36 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC total yr HWY 36
2004 116,448 110,746 134,619 121,526 188,568 222,579 283,984 262,658 239,273 195,706 121,766 104,995 2,102,868 2004
2005 114,815 111,692 125,042 142,303 179,025 184,515 282,807 232,618 212,472 169,361 122,924 114,251 1,991,825 2005
2006 111,078 99,921 114,164 131,880 176,056 223,579 265,185 174,343 247,382 174,566 130,221 103,313 1,951,688 2006
2007 97,633 102,544 125,779 130,662 182,383 233,323 282,990 264,215 263,887 178,635 131,871 105,741 2,099,663 2007
2008 109,283 108,191 96,774 127,108 176,797 232,131 269,225 263,427 226,153 186,073 132,706 114,347 2,042,215 2008
2009 115,474 109,200 120,577 118,856 182,408 240,817 301,540 266,490 244,274 166,227 123,992 106,221 2,096,076 2009
2010 114,197 93,737 119,831 126,827 184,236 233,206 313,090 280,848 263,113 201,875 126,661 118,414 I 2,176,035 2010
2011 111,053 95,896 123,819 128,752 172,612 250,829 325,018 280,707 268,519 202,348 125,489 110,593 2,195,635 2011
2012 114,259 102,925 131,665 146,532 198,240 256,349 297,933 270,623 275,974 181,523 138,504 120,259 2,234,786 2012
2013 118,163 105,098 121,648 111,502 195,555 263,841 315,061 282,806 99,704 32,579 157,727 114,112 1,917,796 2013
2014 97,190 67,468 66,777 64,981 91,872 153,300 NO DATA 183,454 235,988 202,988 125,125 112,887 1,402,030 2014
12015 119,382 100,010 146,909 141,511 199,665 285,013 351,826 323,365 1,667,681 2015
HWYs
34&36 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Annual
2004 221,104 209,530 255,829 237,626 356,402 426,505 543,833 502,341 465,160 331,819 228,122 211,831 3,990,102 2004
2005 213,551 212,268 238,111 246,471 338,024 394,814 552,630 465,826 418,012 325,398 239,108 223,877 3,868,090 2005
2006 215,508 193,851 221,751 255,111 341,417 438,526 520,239 520,239 396,864 324,032 246,044 195,040 3,868,622 2006
2007 185,961 193,007 237,032 246,554 340,936 445,483 542,792 497,365 481,166 329,829 245,243 196,861 3,942,229 2007
2008 204,465 201,971 263,704 237,802 325,203 425,928 510,172 490,577 421,671 345,858 249,057 213,455 3,889,863 2008
2009 216,128 203,837 228,692 223,219 335,131 450,955 563,744 503,020 461,265 306,423 235,032 197,763 3,925,209 2009
2010 209,549 174,513 223,287 237,959 330,513 439,022 578,712 518,837 480,132 403,750 234,114 220,923 4,051,311 2010
2011 207,569 _ 176,920 231,030 239,024 316,524 458,481 592,596 514,140_ 483,697 362,801 232,921 207,321 4,023,024 2011
2012 212,859 190,269 221,916 146,532 198,240 256,349 436,019 525,612 520,595 342,648 267,921 233,457 3,552,417 2012
2013 231,371 206,199 243,673 230,286 381,007 507,262 614,240 537,544 221,488 94,872 253,515 225,918 3,747,375 2013
2014 202,340 164,103 182,973 189,502 272,873 397,968 296,473 461,174 480,868 393,857 246,774 225,564 3,514,469 2014
2015 238,136 198,197 287,704 274,805 383,503 547,902 673,821 608,270 3,212,338 2015
CDOT Monthly Traffic Counts for 2015
Hwy 34 and Hwy 36 Aggregate
700,000 -V
■2010 ■2011 ■2012 ■2013 2014 ■2015
600,000
500,000 II
400,000 �
1
I I
300,000 - T
n II
200,000 -V ofill ii' -
100,000 I I
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
700,000
■2004 ■2005 ■2006 ■2007 ■2008 ■2009
600,000
■2010 ■2011 ■2012 ■2013 ■2014 ■2015
S00,000
400,000
P
300,000 III
I
200,000 ■ 1 '... r 9 111 I I ■ }+ !'i - I
I
100,000 l
I I I I I I
0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
CDOT Monthly Traffic Counts for 2015