HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Transportation Advisory Board 2024-01-171/12/2024
TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD January 17, 2024 12:00 p.m.
REGULAR MEETING Town Hall | Board Room
AGENDA
In-Person Meeting | Board, Staff, and Public
12:00 pm Public Comment
12:10 pm Update on Past Public Comment
12:20 pm Trustee Liaison Update Trustee Martchink
12:30 pm Approval of Minutes dated December 20, 2023 (packet)
12:35 pm Mobility Services Update Supervisor Klein
12:50 pm Transportation Plan Update Manager Solesbee/Supervisor Klein
1:10 pm Engineering Update (packet: Complete Streets Report) Engineer Wittwer
1:25 pm Roundabout Discussion (packet) Member Igel
Designing Streets for Kids (link access only)
1:35 pm Administrative Update Director Muhonen
1:50 pm 2024 TAB Officers Election
1:55 pm Other Business
Adjourn
1
2
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, December 20, 2023
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY
BOARD of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held
in the Municipal Building in said Town of Estes Park on the 20th day of
December, 2023.
Board: Chair Belle Morris; Vice-Chair Kristen Ekeren; Members Javier Bernal,
Jessica Ferko, Ann Finley, Larry Gamble, Linda Hanick, Mark Igel, and
Gordon Slack; Trustee Patrick Martchink; Staff Liaison Greg Muhonen
Attending: Chair Morris; Members Bernal, Gamble, Hanick, and Slack; Director
Muhonen; Engineer Bailey; Supervisor Klein; Recording Secretary
McDonald; Public Attendee Joan Hooper
Absent: Vice-Chair Ekeren, Member Ferko, Member Finley, Member Igel, Trustee
Martchink
Chair Morris called the meeting to order at 12:28 p.m.
TAB APPRECIATION MEAL
During the annual appreciation meal, Director Muhonen thanked the TAB for their various
contributions as a Town advisory board. In particular, he mentioned the following issues
and projects where the TAB’s input and formal recommendations to the Town Board have
been vital: Parking Revenue Task Force; Selection Committee for the Multimodal
Transportation Plan (MTP); visioning for the Cleave Street Improvements project; and
letters of support for paid parking program initiatives.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Public Attendee Joan Hooper (Town resident) elaborated on the two TAB Public
Comment Forms she submitted earlier this day (Recording Secretary note: E-notification
of a second submitted form arrived after the first was copied for meeting distribution; both
forms are in the final packet on the Public Records Portal).
Discussion points from Resident Hooper’s comments included the current funds
allocation for the 1% sales tax renewal, and how activity from citizen groups can still
shape voter opinions prior to the April 2024 ballot; how to further engage public feedback
on the Town of Estes Park 2045 Transportation Plan (TP) survey; aspects of the survey
website and mapping tool that could be improved; and the value of hosting public
meetings.
TRUSTEE LIAISON UPDATE
None.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES DATED NOVEMBER 15, 2023
3
Transportation Advisory Board – December 20, 2023 – Page 2
It was moved and seconded (Slack/Hanick) to approve the November 15, 2023,
minutes, and it passed unanimously.
MOBILITY SERVICES UPATE
Supervisor Klein reported that the 2023 Paid Parking Program Year-End Report was
presented at the November 28 Town Board Study Session. The ordinance amending the
date by which paid parking rates are set for the next season was passed at the December
12 Town Board Meeting (deadline moved from December 31 to March 1).
The occupancy rate for free lots reported at the November meeting was adjusted to
exclude the major lots beyond the downtown core; this adjustment resulted in a 7% boost
from the targeted 85th percentile. The Estes Parking App will be sunset and replaced by
a website that users can bookmark to gauge real-time parking lot availability; this
information and access instructions will be detailed in a future news release. Park Mobile
is developing the Apple Pay tool for the 2024 paid parking season.
A complete report on the 2023 transit program will be presented at the February TAB
meeting. However, Supervisor Klein advised that the goal of 10k transit riders was just
barely missed, likely due to weather during the November 24 Catch the Glow parade.
TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE
Supervisor Klein reported that participation in the TP survey continues to be promoted at
various community events. Comments provided through the Mapping Survey will be
received until the consultants finish the draft TP.
The Town’s application for the CMAQ (Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality) program
grant was presented and favorably received at the December 5 Upper Front Range
Transportation Planning Region (UFRTPR) meeting. An award of $1.2m is likely to be
approved in March 2024, with local match funds coming from monies previously budgeted
for transit operations.
Discussion points included contacting the Estes Park School District (EPSD) regarding
how the TP will address Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program initiatives; how the “living
document” nature of the TP ensures that comments submitted will continue to shape the
plan; and the overall goal of creating a public transportation “triangle” between Denver
International Airport (DIA), Loveland or Longmont, and Estes Park.
ENGINEERING UPDATE
Engineer Bailey reported that the second public meeting for Reclamation Neighborhood
Street Improvements (RNSI) would be held tonight to gather final comments regarding
parking and sidewalk placement options for 3rd Street and North and South Courts. The
bid should be released by early April.
The Estes Park Cycling Coalition (EPCC) provided some comments for the Graves
Avenue Improvements (GAI) project. The bid, which should be released in early February,
will let contractors decide the project’s means and methods to maintain two-way traffic.
4
Transportation Advisory Board – December 20, 2023 – Page 3
The Street Improvement Program (STIP) bid should be released in February. The
program budget reflects modified goals due to the possible sunset of 1A sales tax funds.
Final permits were approved for utility work on the Cleave Street Improvements (CSI)
projects. The bid should be released January 4, with construction aimed to start in March
and conclude in late 2024.
The UFRTPR advised that the Fall River Trail Extension (FRT) grant funds will be
accessible as early as January. However, the bid is on hold pending signed agreements
from the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) for the Multimodal
Transportation and Mitigation Options Fund (MMOF) and Transportation Alternatives
Program (TAP) awards.
Discussion points for all projects included certain issues that the RNSI project cannot
resolve, such as cluster box location; sidewalk width factors for the GAI project; Pine Knoll
and other street segments impacted by the modified STIP budget; locations where fresh
striping or crosswalk signs may be needed; and paving activities at the Elkhorn Lodge.
ADMINISTRATIVE UPDATE
Director Muhonen advised that the 1% sales tax renewal topic is a good opportunity for
the TAB to educate the public and provide input on the measure, possibly through a
citizens’ committee. Signing up for the Town’s email distribution list is the best way to stay
informed about this topic and other Town business.
Four applications have been received for the Project Manager position. The Mobility
Services Manager position is not yet posted.
Having recently fielded an inquiry about Post Office parking during the Downtown Estes
Loop (DEL) project, Director Muhonen advised that Flatiron Constructors, Inc. (FCI) has
permission to use all but 10 spaces in the Post Office lot; supporting signage is posted.
The Town continues to provide snow removal to mitigate parking scarcity in the area.
Snow conditions have contributed to two minor crashes at the new US 36 and Community
Drive roundabout. Brief discussion ensued regarding chicanes and other methods used
at roundabouts to slow down drivers and prevent unnecessary speed-related accidents.
JUNE 2024 TAB MEETING RESCHEDULE
The TAB agreed to reschedule the June 2024 meeting from June 19 (Juneteenth holiday)
to June 26.
OTHER BUSINESS
Chair Morris acknowledged Member Gamble’s recent suggestion to add a regular agenda
item that follows up on past public comments received by the TAB. (Recording Secretary
note: As of January 2024, this item will be added to the monthly agenda as “Update on
Past Public Comment.”) Meanwhile, Chair Morris advised that she had followed up with
5
Transportation Advisory Board – December 20, 2023 – Page 4
CDOT regarding a recent public comment about certain crosswalks along Colorado
Highway 7 needing attention.
There being no further business, Chair Morris adjourned the meeting at 2:00 p.m.
Lani McDonald, Recording Secretary
6
Public Works Report
To: Transportation Advisory Board
From: Trevor Wittwer, EIT, Civil Engineer
Jeffrey Bailey, PE, PTOE, Town Engineer
Date: January 17, 2024
RE: Complete Streets Policy Annual Report for 2023
The Complete Streets Policy 851 helps promote the development of a multimodal
transportation network that will provide access to all users. The policy indicates that
tracking and reporting should be done over the course of a project. This policy was
implemented throughout the design stages of several projects in 2023.
2023 Reporting Data:
1. Number of projects completed: 2 (two) final designs completed in 2023
a. Cleave Street Improvements
b. Graves Avenue – Safe Routes to School (SRTS)
Complete Streets Final Checklists are attached
2. Number of projects incorporating complete streets infrastructure: 1 (one) during
design development
a. Fall River Trail Final Segment (TAP & MMOF) - not yet at final design
Note: Fall River Trail (CtB) will be incorporated with the Fall River Trail Final
Segment project
3. Number of transit and non-motorized users:
a. Cleave Street Improvements will add non-motorized user features that will
increase users of the corridor
b. Graves Avenue-SRTS will add non-motorized user features that will
increase users of the corridor
c. Fall River Trail Final Segment will add transit and non-motorized user
features that will increase users along the US 34 corridor
The overall community perception of all three projects listed above was positive,
specifically for addressing a multimodal use and including Complete Streets
infrastructure. The TAB is encouraged to provide ongoing feedback and act as a conduit
for public participation on the implementation of Complete Streets practices.
1. Attachments: Policy 851 - Complete Streets
2. Final Complete Streets Checklist for Cleave Street Improvements
3. Final Complete Streets Checklist for Graves Avenue SRTS
7
Effective Period:Until Superceded
Review Schedule:Annual
Effective Date:April 23,2019
References:Downtown Plan
PUBLIC WORKS
851
Complete Streets
Engineering Division
1.PURPOSE
This policy establishes practices within the Public Works Department to promote and
encourage the development of a multi-modal transportation network that will provide
access to all users.Through the application of Complete Streets principles,we will
provide comprehensive,safe,convenient,and comfortable routes for walking,bicycling,
and public transportation.This will encourage active living lifestyles,wellness,reduce
traffic congestion,reduce noise and air pollution,and improve the safety and quality of
life of Estes Park residents and visitors.
2.POLICY
The Town of Estes Park Complete Streets Policy is attached as Appendix 1.
3.PROCEDURE
The attached Complete Streets Policy includes procedures to implement the policy
(Section 2),procedures to track &report application of the policy over time (Section 3),
a Complete Streets Checklist (Exhibit A),and Traffic Calming Guidelines (Exhibit B).
Approved:
Todd Jirs ,Mayor
‘-‘las!,,
Date
Document Title Final 4/23/19
Revisions:0 Town of Estes Park, Public Works Page 1 of 6
12
APPENDIX I -Town of Estes Park Complete Streets Policy
Statement of Intent:
The Town of Estes Park,through the adoption of this Complete Streets Policy,intends to
promote and encourage the development of a multi-modal transportation network that will
provide access to all users.
Introduction
Complete Streets are streets for everyone.A Complete Streets approach integrates people
and place in the planning,design,construction,operation, and
maintenance of our
transportation networks.This helps to ensure streets are safe for people of all ages and
abilities,balance the needs of different modes,and support local land uses,economies,
cultures,and natural environments.Complete Streets make it easy to cross the street,walk to
shops,and bicycle for work,play,shopping,and recreation.
A Complete Streets Policy allows planners and designers to understand and meet the actual
mobility needs of every community member,however,they travel -by foot,bicycle,scooter,
skateboard,shuttle or automobile.A Complete Street ultimately encourages all community
members to utilize mobility options to access destinations such as schools,downtown
businesses,neighborhoods and recreation areas.This makes it easier for shuttles to run on
time and make it safe for people to walk to and from parking areas such as the Visitor Center
Parking Structure.
Every transportation project that implements the Complete Streets approach will make the
multi-modal transportation network better and safer for motorists,drivers,transit riders,
pedestrians,and bicyclists,thus making the town a better place to live and visit.
Policy
1.DEFINITIONS:The following words and phrases,whenever used in this Policy,shall
have the meanings defined in this section unless the context clearly requires otherwise:
a.Complete Street Infrastructure:According to the National Complete Streets
Coalition,appropriate elements that make up a complete street would include
sidewalks,bicycle lanes,shared use paths,designated transit lanes,safe and
accessible transit stops,safe crossings for pedestrians (including median
islands),grade separated crossings (i.e.underpasses or overpasses),
accessible pedestrian signals,and curb extensions.Additionally,they include
Document Title Final 4/23/19
Revisions:0 Town of Estes Park,Public Works Page 2 of 6
13
features identified in the Estes Valley Trails Master Plan and the Estes Park
Downtown plan.
b.“Street”includes streets,avenues,boulevards,road,lanes,alleys,and all
public ways.
c.“Street Project”means the capital construction or capital reconstruction of any
street,whether by the public or private sector,and includes the planning,
design,approval,and implementation processes.Operation and maintenance
(O&M)based projects are excluded.
d.“Multi-modal Transportation Network”means all facilities,vehicles and
devices designed to facilitate the mobility of people.
e. “Users”are individuals who use the Multi-modal Transportation Network.
Categories of Users include pedestrians,bicyclists,motor vehicle drivers,
public transportation riders and people of all ages and abilities.
2.IMPLEMENTATION.
a.The Town of Estes Park shall consider every Street Project an opportunity to
incorporate the principles of Complete Streets.
b.The Town of Estes Park will work in coordination with other organizations,agencies,
and jurisdictions to achieve safe,convenient and connected Complete Streets
infrastructure within the Multi-modal Transportation Network.
c.This policy will be used as a guide to the Town of Estes Park in development of
transportation plans,transit plans,and design standards.As practicable,these
documents and tools will be updated to reflect this Complete Streets Policy.
d.Implementation of the Complete Streets Policy will consider the adjacent
neighborhood,completion of the multi-modal network,priority corridors,and the
financial costs of the Complete Street elements.
e.The Complete Streets Checklist at Exhibit A below will be used in planning,design
and construction or reconstruction of all transportation projects.
f.Public works will present to the Transportation Advisory Board,CDOT (for proposed
work within the CDOT right of way),and to the general public at neighborhood
meetings all street reconstructions,modifications,and construction projects at the
30%preliminary design stage and 90%final design stage.When the proposed
street work is at a location governed by the Complete Streets Policy,the
presentation will include the Complete Streets Checklist results,recommended
design cross-section,alternative improvements,if any,construction cost estimates
for each alternative,clarification of maintenance responsibility,and estimated
maintenance costs.
g.Implementation of relevant parts of the Downtown Plan will also be considered in the
implementation of this policy.
Document Title Final 4/23/19
Revisions:0 Town of Estes Park,Public Works Page 3 of 6
14
h.Public works will encourage projects undertaken by other public agencies and
private sector development to follow this policy.
i.Exceptions to this policy for any Street Project can only be granted with the approval
of the Public Works Director and the Town Administrator after coordination with the
Transportation Advisory Board.
3.DATA COLLECTION AND PROGRESS REPORTING
a.The Town will periodically collect,review and report performance data and benchmark
measurements to demonstrate the effectiveness of this policy.This will include:number
of projects completed,number of projects incorporating complete streets infrastructure,
actual infrastructure added,number of transit and non-motorized users,and community
attitudes and perceptions.
b.The Transportation Advisory Board and the Shuttle Committee are encouraged to
provide ongoing feedback and act as a conduit for public participation on the
implementation of Complete Streets practices.
DocumentTitle Final 4/23/19
Revisions:0 Town of Estes Park, Public Works Page 4 of 6
15
Exhibit A
Complete Streets Checklist
1.Existing Conditions:
a.What accommodations for bicycles,pedestrians,and transit are included in the
existing facility and on facilities it intersects or crosses?
b.If there are not pedestrian or bicycle facilities and transit,how far from the proposed
project are the closest parallel walkways and bicycle facilities?
c.Are there existing impediments for bicycle,transit,and pedestrian travel that the
proposed project could address?
d.What current or future trip generators are in the vicinity of the proposed project that
could potentially attract more pedestrians,bicyclists,employees,transit or users of
other travel modes?
e.Did the project design consider conflicts between users of different modes of travel,
including bicyclists,pedestrians,motor vehicles,transit or others?
f.Do any previously adopted plans call for the installation of bicycle or pedestrian
facilities such as bike or multi modal lanes on,crossing,or adjacent to the proposed
facility?If yes,list the applicable plans.
2.Project Scope
h.What accommodations,if any,are included for bicycle,pedestrians,and transit in
the proposed project design?
i.If the proposed project does not include bicycle and pedestrian facilities,list
reasons.
j.State the cost of the bicycle and pedestrian facilities and their proportion of the total
project cost.
k.What entity or district will be responsible for the maintenance of the bicycle and
pedestrian facilities and how will they be budgeted?
I.To what extent does the project include steps to calm traffic as outlined in the
attached traffic calming guidelines at Exhibit B.
DocumentTitle Final 4/23/19
Revisions:0 Town of Estes Park, Public Works Page 5 of 6
16
Exhibit B
Traffic Calming Guidelines
The following guidelines are not intended to be exhaustive but to give policymakers, the
general public,planners,and designers a general idea of what traffic calming is about.For
example,more detailed guidance and ideas can be found in the publication from The Institute
of Transportation Engineers’(ITE)entitled Traffic Calming:State of the Practice.This defines
traffic calming as “the combination of mainly physical measures that reduce the negative
effects of motor vehicle use,alter driver behavior and improve conditions for non-motorized
street users.”
Suggested road designs that say slow down
1.Design roads that create a subconscious need to slow down.
2.Design roads that incorporate artifacts that encourage people to slow down.
3.Create roadways that make vehicle users feel uncomfortable to speed down residential
roads.
4.Create roadways that have narrow lane width.
5.Add trees,garden plots,sculptures and benches along roadway shoulders to create
calm and visual enjoyment for all users.
6.Add physical design of road signs.
7.Trees,bike lanes,and sidewalks included in designs.
8.Consider alternatives to traffic lights at intersections such as roundabouts to improve
traffic flow and calming.
Document Title Final 4/23/19
Revisions:0 Town of Estes Park,Public works Page 6 of 6
17
Complete Streets Checklist
PROJECT: Graves Avenue – Safe Routes to School (SRTS)
Final 1-10-24
1. Existing Conditions:
a. What accommodations for bicycles, pedestrians, and transit are included in the existing facility and on
facilities it intersects or crosses?
Answer: There are no con�nuous sidewalks or bike lanes along Graves Avenue. Three proper�es have a 5'
wide sidewalk and one property has an 8' wide sidewalk. Along State Highway 7, a 5' wide concrete
sidewalk exists north of Graves, and an 8' wide asphalt path exists south of Graves. A rectangular rapid
flashing beacon (RRFB) has been installed across Highway 7 at the northwest end of Graves Avenue. At
Community Drive, there exists a 5' wide sidewalk north of Graves, as well as crosswalks across Community
Drive to connect to the 8' wide sidewalk for the Estes Valley Community Center (EVCC). There is a transit
stop at the EVCC, but no transit stop along Graves Avenue.
b. If there are not pedestrian or bicycle facilities and transit, how far from the proposed project are the
closest parallel walkways and bicycle facilities?
Answer: Manford Avenue includes facili�es for pedestrians, cyclists, and transit. It is approximately 500'
north of Graves using Community Drive, or 1250' north of Graves along Highway 7.
c. Are there existing impediments for bicycle, transit, and pedestrian travel that the proposed project could
address?
Answer: Yes. At a minimum, the project needs to establish a con�nuous sidewalk along Graves Avenue to
provide a safe route to school. Ideally, the project will address pedestrian and cyclist movements along
both sides of Graves Avenue. The project does not need to include improvements for transit.
d. What current or future trip generators are in the vicinity of the proposed project that could potentially
attract more pedestrians, bicyclists, employees, transit, or users of other travel modes?
Answer: Mul�ple housing developments, numerous businesses, Estes Park School District, Estes Valley
Community Center, Estes Park Fairgrounds, Stanley Park Ball Field, Fish Creek Trail, and Lake Estes Trail.
e. Did the project design consider conflicts between users of different modes of travel, including bicyclists,
pedestrians, motor vehicles, transit, or others?
Answer: The project recognizes the conflicts between motor vehicles and pedestrians/cyclists, especially
at driveway access points where lines of sight may be obstructed by on-street parking.
f. Do any previously adopted plans call for the installation of bicycle or pedestrian facilities such as bike or
multimodal lanes on, crossing, or adjacent to the proposed facility? If yes, list the applicable plans.
Answer: The Estes Valley Master Trails Plan does not currently iden�fy the need for bicycle or pedestrian
facili�es on Graves Avenue. It is planned to be inserted into this document, along with other community-
wide needs, later in 2021.
2. Project Scope
9
g. What accommodations, if any, are included for bicycle, pedestrians, and transit in the proposed project
design?
Answer: A con�nuous sidewalk is proposed along both sides of Graves Avenue. An 8' wide atached
sidewalk along the south side of Graves Avenue, and a 5’ wide atached sidewalk along the north side of
Graves Avenue. These would accommodate both pedestrian and cyclists. No accommoda�on is offered
for transit.
h. If the proposed project does not include bicycle and pedestrian facilities, list reasons.
Answer: The project provides facili�es for both bicyclists and pedestrians.
i. State the cost of the bicycle and pedestrian facilities and their proportion of the total project cost.
Answer: 100% of the project costs are related to bicycle and pedestrian facili�es and associated
improvements. Preliminary construc�on cost es�mates range from $900k to $1M for both phases of the
project (north and south side).
j. What entity or district will be responsible for the maintenance of the bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and
how will they be budgeted?
Answer: The SRTS grant applica�on stated that the Town will be responsible for maintenance through the
Parks Division. It will be budgeted through the Trails budget and maintained on the same schedule as other
Town -maintained trails.
k. To what extent does the project include steps to calm traffic as outlined in the attached traffic calming
guidelines at Exhibit B?
Answer: Construc�ng a con�nuous atached sidewalk will make the road feel narrower and will create a
subconscious need to slow down. The presence of on-street parking and numerous driveway access points
will also enforce the need to slow down. A mid-block crosswalk is proposed, which will also help vehicles
slow down. Addi�onal advanced warning signage related to the mid-block crosswalk will also be installed.
10
Exhibit A
Complete Streets Checklist
PROJECT: Cleave Street Improvements (100% Design)
December 20, 2023
1. Existing Conditions:
a. What accommodations for bicycles, pedestrians, and transit are included in the existing facility and on
facilities it intersects or crosses?
Currently, Cleave Street has the look, feel, and operational characteristics of service corridor. While there are
some residential uses and sidewalk segments along the corridor, there are no connected pedestrian facilities
and there are no accommodations for bicycles. There are also no transit accommodations along Cleave Street,
but there are several nearby transit stops along Elkhorn Avenue.
b. If there are not pedestrian or bicycle facilities and transit, how far from the proposed project are the closest
parallel walkways and bicycle facilities?
The nearest parallel walkways are approximately 150’ south of the corridor along West Elkhorn Avenue. The
nearest bicycle facility is the Fall River Trail, located approximately 200’ west of the western terminus of the
proposed improvement project.
c. Are there existing impediments for bicycle, transit, and pedestrian travel that the proposed project could
address?
Yes. As mentioned above, the existing sidewalks lack continuity and are in various states of disrepair. The
existing roadway surface is uneven and broken in places; and intermittent wintertime icy conditions—due to
poor drainage conditions—all make pedestrian and bicycle mobility a challenge. The proposed project will
provide a uniform concrete surface and will resolve the longstanding drainage issues.
d. What current or future trip generators are in the vicinity of the proposed project that could potentially attract
more pedestrians, bicyclists, employees, transit or users of other travel modes?
A current private redevelopment project on the west end of Cleave Street, and a proposed private
redevelopment of the Old Church Shops midblock, will draw additional pedestrian and bicycle traffic to the
corridor along with additional employee traffic. It is expected that these redevelopments, if successful, will also
serve as a catalyst for additional future redevelopment, potentially drawing even more pedestrians, cyclists, and
employees to the corridor.
e. Did the project design consider conflicts between users of different modes of travel, including bicyclists,
pedestrians, motor vehicles, transit or others?
Yes, the proposed design draws largely from the vision expressed in the 2018 Downtown Plan while also
considering the input received from two public meeting and a public survey. The resulting design accommodates
mobility-challenged individuals, pedestrians, bicycles, automobiles, and delivery vehicles in a plaza-esque space
with stamped colored concrete that incorporates traffic calming features and design elements, such as raised
planters and bollards, that enhance the overall safety of the corridor.
f. Do any previously adopted plans call for the installation of bicycle or pedestrian facilities such as bike or
multimmodal lanes on, crossing, or adjacent to the proposed facility? If yes, list the applicable plans.
Yes, the 2018 Downtown Plan established the vision for Cleave Street to be developed as an activated
multimodal corridor with enhanced pedestrian and bicycle circulation.
2. Project Scope
h. What accommodations, if any, are included for bicycle, pedestrians, and transit in the proposed project
design?
Cleave Street is being designed as a corridor that is welcoming to all users with only limited defined spaces for
different modes of travel. The desired result is a low-speed corridor that accommodates all users equally, while
still accommodating the needs of the area businesses. Because adequate transit opportunities are provided
nearby along Elkhorn Avenue, there is currently no plan to add transit stops along Cleave Street.
i. If the proposed project does not include bicycle and pedestrian facilities, list reasons.
The Cleave Street Improvement Project has no marked bicycle facilities, and sidewalks are only provided where
necessary to maintain an accessible path per ADA regulations or to address topographic difficulties. Alternately,
the roadway is being designed as a low-speed, shared space for all modes of travel; specifying particular areas
for individual modes of travel would be counter to the overall vision and could encourage increased vehicular
speeds.
j. State the cost of the bicycle and pedestrian facilities and their proportion of the total project cost.
Since the project is being developed as an activated multimodal corridor with only limited areas devoted solely
to pedestrian traffic, it can be conservatively estimated that 25% ($75k) of the total $3m budget will be to the
benefit of the bike and pedestrian communities. The remaining 75% will be dedicated to subsurface issues and
drainage improvements.
k. What entity or district will be responsible for the maintenance of the bicycle and pedestrian facilities and how
will they be budgeted?
The Town of Estes Park will be responsible for maintenance of the facility and is expected to be budgeted as part
of the Town’s annual budget.
I. To what extent does the project include steps to calm traffic as outlined in the attached traffic calming
guidelines at Exhibit B?
Traffic calming is being accommodated through several design features. The actual vehicle travel path has been
narrowed to 20’ and effectively chicaned through the use of raised planters. Also, individual planter pots,
benches, and the colored and patterned concrete surface all give the impression that, while vehicular traffic is
permitted, it is not a space for high speeds. Finally, the improved Cleave Street will still need to accommodate
the various delivery needs of the adjacent businesses, and the associated delivery vehicles will further reduce
through-traffic speeds as a result of both their size and intermittent presence.
18
What is a Roundabout?
A roundabout is a type of circular intersection, but is
quite unlike a neighborhood traffic circle or large rotary.
Roundabouts have been proven safer and more efficient
than other types of circular intersections.
Roundabouts have certain essential distinguishing features:
•Counterclockwise Flow. Traffic travels
counterclockwise around a center island.
•Entry Yield Control. Vehicles entering the roundabout
yield to traffic already circulating.
•Low Speed. Curvature that results in lower vehicle
speeds (15-25 mph) throughout the roundabout.
FHWA identified roundabouts as a Proven Safety
Countermeasure because of their ability to substantially
reduce the types of crashes that result in injury or loss of life.
Roundabouts are designed to improve safety for all users,
including pedestrians and bicycles. They also provide significant
operational benefits compared to conventional intersections.
Cover photo source: Google Earth Pro
ROUNDABOUTS
with Pedestrians & Bicycles
A Safe Choice for Everyone
For More Information
Jeffrey Shaw, P.E., PTOE, PTP
FHWA Office of Safety
202.738.7793 or jeffrey.shaw@dot.gov
Hillary Isebrands, P.E., PhD
FHWA Resource Center
720.545.4367 or hillary.isebrands@dot.gov
To learn more about roundabouts, please visit:
safety.fhwa.dot.gov
Publication number FHWA-SA-15-016 Updated Sept. 2020
Educational Resources
Michigan “How to Use a Roundabout – Sharing
the Road” Informational Brochure
www.michigan.gov/documents/mdot/MDOT_
RoundaboutPedBikeBrochure_465164_7.pdf
New York Guidance for Roundabout Users
www.dot.ny.gov/main/roundabouts/guide-users/pedestrians
Washington State videos for Roundabouts and
Pedestrians and Bicycles
www.wsdot.wa.gov/Safety/roundabouts/PedestriansCyclists.htm
Circulatory
roadway
Counterclockwise
circulation
Accessible
pedestrian crossing
ApronSplitter
island
Pavement
Markings at Entry
Landscape
buffer
Bicycle lane
treatment
Central
island
Sidewalk or
shared use
path
Figure 1. Modern Roundabout Schematic
Leveraging Partnerships
PEDSAFE Pedestrian Safety Guide &
Countermeasure Selection System - Roundabouts
www.pedbikeinfo.org/data/faq_details.cfm?id=3454
BIKESAFE Bicycle Safety Guide & Countermeasure
Selection System – Roundabouts
www.pedbikesafe.org/PEDSAFE/countermeasures_detail.
cfm?CM_NUM=25
Choosing Roundabouts for Safe Routes to School
www.saferoutesinfo.org/program-tools/case-study-bellingham-wa
AARP Livable Communities Fact Sheet Series
www.aarp.org/livable-communities/info-2014/livability-
factsheet-modern-roundabouts.html
On average, roundabouts reduce severe crashes –
those resulting in injury or loss of life – by 78-82%1
1 Highway Safety Manual, American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials, Washington, DC, 2010.
19
CROSSWALK
SETBACK
Source: Janet M. Barlow, Accessible Design for the Blind
Source: www.pedbikeimages.org / Dan Burden
Source: Jeffrey Shaw, FHWA
Source: City of Santa Cruz
Lower speed.
Traffic speed at any road
or intersection is vitally
important to the safety of
everyone, and especially
non-motorized users.
Lower speed is associated
with better yielding
rates, reduced vehicle
stopping distance, and
lower risk of collision
injury or fatality. Also,
the speed of traffic
through a roundabout
is more consistent with
comfortable bicycle
riding speed.
Source: Hillary Isebrands, FHWA
Shorter, setback crossings.
Pedestrians cross a shorter distance of only one
direction of traffic at a time since the entering
and exiting flows are separated. Drivers focus on
pedestrians apart from entering, circulating and
exiting maneuvers.
Less conflict.Roundabouts have fewer conflict
points. A single lane roundabout has 50% fewer
pedestrian-vehicle conflict points than a comparable
stop or signal controlled intersection. Conflicts
between bicycles and vehicles are reduced as well.
Features for All Users. Adding certain
treatments at roundabouts can enhance the
experience for both pedestrians and bicycles.
•At more complex roundabouts, such as those
with multiple lanes, certain design elements
and enhanced crossing treatments can improve
accessibility for visually impaired pedestrians.
•Where bicycle facilities lead to a roundabout,
providing an option to bicyclists to either ride
in the travel lane or use a ramp to and from a
separated shared use path.
20