HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015 Resolution No. 097•
•
•
RESOLUTION NO. {j 7
SERIES OF 2015
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ADOPTION OF THE "ENGLEWOOD WALK &
WHEEL MASTER PLAN' AS A SUPPORTING DOCUMENT TO ROADMAP
ENGLEWOOD: THE 2003 ENGLEWOOD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ENGLEWOOD
FORWARD: THE 2016 ENGLEWOOD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN'.
WHEREAS, the Englewood Walle and Wheel project started in September of2014 with a
meeting with Kaiser Permanente Technical Assistance Team, as well as the development of the
community engagement plan in conjunction with the related Englewood Forward planning
projects; and
WHEREAS, the Englewood Walle and Wheel Master Plan and Program was funded by the
Kaiser Permanente Walle and Wheel Grant program with Englewood being awarded with a
$99,999 for the Englewood Walle and Wheel Master Plan and Program; and
WHEREAS, the Englewood City Council approved a consultant contract with OV Consulting
by the passage of a Motion on September 15, 2014; and
WHEREAS, the Englewood Walle and Wheel Master Plan and Program lays out a long term
vision for the City's Walle and Wheel Network that includes on-street bicycle routes, off-street
trails, and enhanced pedestrian routes in a series of maps for each quadrant of the City; and
WHEREAS, the Englewood Walle and Wheel Master Plan and Program identifies lists of
quick win and transformative projects; and
WHEREAS, a Public Hearing on this Plan was held by the Englewood City Council on
October 19, 2015 as required.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby approves the
adoption of the "Englewood Walle & Wheel Master Plan", attached hereto, as a supporting
document to Roadmap Englewood: The 2003 Englewood Comprehensive Plan and Englewood
Forward: The 2016 Englewood Comprehensive Plan.
Section 2. The City Council directs the City Manager to complete the quick win projects by
December of 2016 and complete and create and implementation plan for the transformative
projects by that same date.
ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 2nd day of November, 2015 .
1
• I, Loucrisbia A. Ellis , City Clerk for ~ -;1ity of Englewood, Colorado , hereby certify the
above is a true copy of Resolution No. 'f' , Series of 2015.
•
•
2
'
•
•
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
Meeting Date: Agenda Item: Subject:
November 2, 2015 11 ci Resolution Adopting the
Englewood Walk and
Wheel Master Plan and
Program
Initiated By: Staff Source:
Community Development John Voboril, Planner II
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION
City Council approved a consultant contract by motion with OV Consulting on
September 15, 2014. City Council study sessions were held on February 25, April 13,
June 1, and September 14, 2015, to provide updates on project progress.
City Council held a public hearing on the Englewood Walk and Wheel Master Plan and
Program at the October 19, 2015, regular City Council meeting.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Community Development staff recommends that City Council approve a resolution
adopting the Englewood Walk and Wheel Master Plan and Program as a supplementary
City plan document in support of Roadmap Englewood: The 2003 Englewood
Comprehensive Plan, and Englewood Forward: the 2016 Englewood Comprehensive
Plan.
BACKGROUND, ANALYSIS, AND ALTERNATIVES IDENTIFIED
The Englewood Walk and Wheel Master Plan and Program was funded through the
Kaiser Permanente Walk and Wheel Grant program. The City of Englewood received
$99,999 for the Englewood Walk and Wheel Master Plan and Program, with no City
match required.
Meeting Event Dates
Project consultant OV Consulting held three sets of meeting events for stakeholders
and the general public in conjunction with the larger Englewood Forward planning
process on November 12, 2014, February 11, 2015, and June 20, 2015. The June 20
meeting was advertised as the Englewood Walk and Wheel Fest, and featured
temporarily installed demonstration projects of bicycle and pedestrian improvements.
Planning Process Scope of Work
• The Walk and Wheel project kicked off in September of 2014 with an initial meeting with
the Kaiser Permanente Technical Assistance Team, as well as the development of a
, , • 2
community engagement plan in conjunction with the related Englewood Forward •
planning projects . These first steps were followed quickly with the gathering of bicycle
and pedestrian counts at key locations . The counts provided a base line of current
activity that will be used to measure increases in walking and bicycling in the future.
The consultant team worked on two major project tasks during the early months of
2015: the Economics of Walking and Wheeling task, and the Documentation of the
State of Walking and Wheeling in Englewood task. Economic, health, transportation,
and environmental benefits were quantified based on three level of investment
scenarios . The consultant team conducted a demand analysis by mapping where
people live, work, and learn, and also developed a level of stress assessment for the
Englewood street network which identified street segments where bicyclists and
pedestrians feel least comfortable due to conflicts with and close proximity to fast
moving automobile traffic.
The consultant team also conducted study sessions with City Council and the
Englewood Transportation Advisory Committee to educate members on the findings of
the project and gather input on the preliminary network vision. These meetings laid the
ground work for the Englewood Walk and Wheel Fest community event that was
celebrated on June 20.
Walk and Wheel Recommendations
Walk and Wheel Network
The Englewood Walk and Wheel Master Plan and Program lays out a long term vision
for the City's Walk and Wheel Network in a series of maps for each quadrant of the City.
The network includes on-street bicycle routes, off-street trails, and enhanced pedestrian
routes.
Quick Win Projects
In order to support the City Manager in his call for quick win projects that can be
implemented immediately for relatively low costs, a number of quick win projects have
been identified:
• Dartmouth Avenue: Shared bicycle/parking lane striping
• Clarkson Street: Sharrows
• Oxford Avenue: Bicycle Lane Markings/Sharrows
• Sherman Street: Sharrows
• Little Dry Creek Trail: Improved wayfinding signage
• Pedestrian Wayfinding Signage from Englewood Station to Medical District
• Little Dry Creek Trail Enhancement at Englewood Marketplace (addition to Quick
Win project list per the request of Mayor Penn)
Transformative Projects
•
•
•
•
•
•
The following projects have been identified that would make the most difference in
transforming the walking and wheeling environment in Englewood, and should be
implemented as second wave projects:
• Floyd Avenue Bicycle Lanes -Sherman to Inca
• Oxford Avenue One Way Pair Cycle Track-Navajo to Broadway
• Sherman Street Bicycle Boulevard
• Rail Trail
• Broadway Mid-Block Pedestrian Crossings -Paseos and Gothic Theatre
• Broadway Enhanced Pedestrian Crossings -Englewood Parkway and Floyd
Avenue
Conformance with Comprehensive Plan
3
The Englewood Walk and Wheel Master Plan and Program is consistent with the vision,
goals, and objectives found in Roadmap Englewood: The 2003 Englewood
Comprehensive Plan, and Englewood Forward: The 2016 Englewood Comprehensive
Plan Update .
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The adoption of the Englewood Walk and Wheel Master Plan and Program will not
directly obligate City Council to fund recommended improvements identified in the plan.
Staff will continue to work with consultants to put together 100% design drawings and
construction budgets for the quick win projects, which will be brought forward to Council
for authorization.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Englewood Walk and Wheel Master Plan and Program
Planning and Zoning Commission Findings of Fact
Planning and Zoning Commission September 9, 2015 Public Hearing Minutes
Resolution
•
Englewood
Walk & Wheel
Master Plan
Final Draft
September 2, 2015
• ENGLEWOOD
FORWARD
MA;%;\~A~ & ~~~A~1L
JI\\ alta ~
KAISER PERMANENTE . thrive -•
-'
Pl.ANNINO• DESIGN i'!.:iu::1•1•-•D,mpn •-,Ac.1.,m
~ •
September 2, 2015
• .. -
Final Draft
G. Potential Economic Benefits G-1
Table of Contents Quantified Benefit Calculation ______________ G-2
Health Benefits G-5
Table of Contents _______________ _ Environmental Benefits G-6
Transportation Benefits G-7
A. Introduction ________________ A-1 Total Benefits G-8
B. State of Walking and Wheeling ________ B-1
Plan and Study Review 8-1
Existing Infrastructure B-4
Bicycle Demand Analysis (BOA) B-8
Level of Traffic Stress Analysis B-15
c. Community and Stakeholder Engagement ____ C-1
Englewood Forward Branding and Communications ______ C-1
Public Meetings C-2
Focused Outreach C-5
Walk and Wheel Festival C-5
o. Plan Recommendations D-1
Areas of Emphasis D-1
Infrastructure Recommendations D-5
Transformative Projects D-7
Other Key Recommendations D-7
Programmatic Recommendations D-13
E. Implementation _______________ E-1
Quick Wins E-1
Next Steps E-5
F. Maintenance Considerations F-1
Importance of Proper Maintenance F-1
Primary Maintenance Functions F-1
Research Methodology F-2
Research Findings F-2
Case Studies -Why Other Communities are Successful F-4
-•
List of Tables
Table B-1: Data Inputs Information __________ B-8
Table B-2: Methods for the Level of Traffic Stress Analysis __ B-15
Table E-1: Programmatic Recommendations ______ D-14
Table F-1: Agency Staff Contacted Regarding Bicycle and Pedestrian
Facility Maintenance _____________ F-2
Table F-2: Maintenance Policy and Funding Summary by Agency
Interviewed ________________ F-3
Table G-1: General Characteristics Comparison of Selected Peer
Cities __________________ G-3
Table G-2: Estimated Future Walk and bike Mode Split ___ G-4
Table G-3: Annual Health Benefits __________ G-6
Table G-4: Annual Environmental Benefits G-7
Table G-5: Annual Transportation Benefits G-8
Table G-6: Total Annual Benefits G-8
List of Figures
Figure A-1: Planning Process ____________ A-1
Figure B-1: Map of Current Bicycle Paths/Trails and On-Street Routes
__________________ B-4
Figure B-2: Bicycle Parking Locations in the City Center, Broadway
Corridor, and the Hospital District ________ B-5
Figure B-3: Bicycle Parking Locations Near the Oxford LRT Station
and the Recreation Center ___________ B-5
Figure B-4 : Pedestrian and Bicycle Counts Total ______ B-6
ii
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Figure B-5: Average Number of Bicycle and Pedestrian Counts Per
Hour Over All Count Locations. __________ B-6
Figure B-6: Total Bicycle and Pedestrian Volumes at Each Count
Location _________________ B-7
Figure B-7: Pedestrian and Bicycle Split. _________ B-7
Figure B-8: Bicycle Intersection Preferences _______ B-7
Figure B-9: Where People Live Census 2010 Block Level Population
Density __________________ B-9
Figure B-10: Where People Work -Trip Ends for People of
Englewood Regardless of Residency ________ B-10
Figure B-11: Where People Learn -K-12, Community College and
University En rollment _____________ B-11
Figure B-12 : Where People Shop and Play _______ B-12
Figure B-13 : Where People Access Transit _______ B-13
Figure B-14: Composite Demand B-14
Figure B-15: Level of Traffic Stress B-16
Figure B-16: Level of Traffic Stress -Connectivity Analysis __ B-17
Figure D-1 : Infrastructure Recommendations for Pedestrians and
Bicycles for Englewood ____________ D-6
Figure E-1: Quick Wins _____________ E-2
Figure G-1:Economic Benefits of Bikeways G-1
Figure G-2: Health and Safety Benefits of Bikeways G-2
• LEWOO D
FOR W ARD
WALK \.' WHEEL
1-.,tf..::,lll<t Pl /\1•1 !_"!/_ t•f ,~-;12A.,_,
A. Introduction
The City of Englewood embarked on three simultaneous studies in
2014-2015 that directly address the City's transportation network,
options for improved multi-modal connectivity and increasing
community awarenes s of biking and walking as a transportation
alternative:
• Englewood Comprehensive Plan Update
• Englewood Light Rail Corridor Next Steps Study
• Englewood Walk and Wheel Master Plan and Program
These studies were collaborative in nature and
were collectively termed Englewood Forward.
Stakeholder and public input was essential to
understanding Englewood today, developing a
vision of Englewood tomorrow and identifying
the recommendations to move Englewood
toward that vision.
E N G LEW o O D The Walk and Wheel Master Plan was funded
F o R w A R D by a grant from Kaiser Permanente and kicked
off in September 2014. The plan's purpose
was to evaluate the City's current walking and
bicycling conditions and activity, as well as to
develop recommendations for bicycle and
pedestrian infrastructure and programs that
improve safety, increase connectivity and
transportation options, and encourage greater
walking and biking among Englewood
w A L K i w H E E L residents.
Mt\':'.rr; :-,: ,,-.~: 0. r>r ~1-,,,:, ·.,
•
A-1
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
The Walk and Wheel Master Plan builds on the previous Bicycle
Master Plan completed in 2004 and the Community-Wide Bicycle
Route Signage Program implemented in 2012. The planning process,
illustrated in Figure A-1, included extensive stakeholder and
community engagement throughout the project. Recommendations
for the plan were developed through the evaluation of existing
conditions data and field assessment, bicycling and walking demand
analysis, public input and network connectivity evaluation. Toe Plan
identifies Englewood's top priority "transformative" projects to the
bicycle and pedestrian network, highlights "quick wins" for
implementation to begin to enable broader biking and walking and
proposes ideas for encouragement and education programming that
increase visibility and awareness of these active transportation
options.
Figure A-1: Planning Process
Fall
2014
Winter/Spring
2015
Summer
2015 ..----_.,.,.,.._ ____ .. ~ ,-____ _,.....,..._ ___ ~
Englowood
W•lkand
Wheel
1\1.'lsltt
Plan
• • ENGLEWOOD
FORWARD
WALK &',WHEEL
M4..c;TFfl PLAN rROGRAtwt ~
Today Englewood has great high capacity transit access with corridor
bus service north-south along Broadway and two light rail stations
(Oxford Station and Englewood Station at CityCenter Englewood).
The City's street grid creates a strong base for local connectivity and
connects employment, shopping, and higher density residential uses
that lie within the city core. Trail connections within the City link
residents with recreational opportunities. Englewood offers a range
of housing options with a strong base of traditional single-family
neighborhoods, supported by an improving school system both in
terms of programming and facilities. However, Englewood is missing
a comprehensive strategy to enable pedestrian and bicycle mobility
as an alternative to automobile travel throughout the community.
The city lacks dedicated on-street facilities for bicycling and defined
pedestrian corridors with enhanced pedestrian facilities and crossings
that make walking and biking comfortable, viable options for the
majority of residents and visitors. Also of interest is the current and
future makeup of Englewood in terms of population and
demographic trends. The City has a large population of seniors and
is becoming increasingly attractive to the Millennial age group due to
its proximity to Denver and lower relative housing costs. Several
factors around these demographic groups strongly support the
growth of a bike and pedestrian environment in Englewood:
• There has been a significant increase in bicycle use among
seniors age 65 plus since 1995
• Baby boomers are looking for alternatives to the car and seeking
options to "age in place"
• Millennials exhibit a preference for urban environments that have
walkable places, and they are willing to pay a premium and
reduce living space to be able to walk to shops and amenities
■ 26% of Millennials do not have a driver's license
• 45% of Millennials report making a conscious effort to replace
driving with alternative forms of transportation
Through this study, the City of Englewood is looking to improve
community awareness and increase the visibility of bicycle and
A-2
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
pedestrian transportation options through the identification and
implementation of enhanced bike and pedestrian facilities. The city
also hopes to create a community environment that embraces active
transportation, attracts new residents and creates a strong vibrant
economic base for the City.
.LEWOOD
FO RW ARD
WALK i,' WHEEL
,T1A:.:i:c..r~ 1'l. .e..M (:-:{ Pr0-;1~1•·-·
B. State of Walking and
Wheeling
The state of Walking and Wheeling in Englewood today was
assessed through the review of previous planning documentation, an
inventory of bike and pedestrian infrastructure, targeted counts of
walking and biking activity and an assessment of demand. Today's
conditions present many challenges to bike and pedestrian mobility
and identify potential opportunities for improved connections and
facilities.
Plan and Stud)f Revnew
The following City of Englewood Plans and Studies were reviewed for
bicycle and pedestrian goals and recommendations.
•
•
•
Roadmap Englewood: The 2003 Englewood Comprehensive Plan
City of Englewood Master Bicycle Plan (2004)
Englewood South Broadway Plan
Englewood Complete Streets Toolbox (2011)
Englewood Master Bicycle Plan Route Development Study and
Implementation Program
Englewood Downtown and Medical District Small Area Plan
Englewood Light Rail Corridor Plan
Englewood Parks and Recreation Master Plan
These documents identify goals and related actions that informed
the Plan process and served as a base for overall direction of the
Plan. Relevant goals are listed.
•
B-1
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
ROADMAP ENGLEWOOD: THE 2003 ENGLEWOOD
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Goal 1: Enhance both the mobility and the accessibility of
the transportation system.
Obj. 1-7: Improve directional signage for automobile traffic,
pedestrians, and bicyclists.
Goal 2 : Improve environmental qualities adversely impacted
by automobiles for both local residents and visitors to the
community, while also accommodating commuters.
Obj. 2-4: Support educational efforts to increase awareness of
automobile traffic, pedestrian, and bicyclist safety issues.
Goal 3: Recognize and enhance the relationships between
land use and the transportation system.
Obj. 3-2: Encourage higher-density, pedestrian-oriented, mi xed-use
development along primary mass transit routes.
Goal 4: Promote a quality of life transportation philosophy
that seeks to create an environmentally attractive,
pedestrian-friendly community.
Obj. 4-1: Create continuous transit and non-motorized connections
between CityCenter and downtown Englewood, as well as the
· surrounding residential and business community.
Obj. 4-2: Improve bicycle facilities and infrastructure in strategic
locations throughout the city.
Obj. 4-3: Design safe, attractive, high-volume pedestrian routes
connecting public places that encourage the attention and presence
of people at all hours of the day and night.
• • ENGLEWOOD
FORWAR D
w AL K o, WH-fE-L
MASTF.n Pl.AN Ol PROG ~f\t.l
ENGLEWOOD DOWNTOWN AND MEDICAL DISTRICT SMALL
AREA PLAN
Urban Design and .Amenities Goals
Goal 1: Enhance the Downtown and Medical Center urban
streetscape.
Obj. 1-1: Develop wider, safer, handicapped-accessible sidewalks,
pedestrian paths, and pedestrian crossings throughout the area, and
especially near hospitals and senior facilities.
Obj. 1-5: Enhance streetscapes with urban design features including
benches, lighting, planters, banners, street furniture, and bicycle
racks.
Goal 2: Increase park, open space, and trail capacities and
service levels, both within Downtown and the Medical
Center and beyond.
Obj. 2-1: Create pedestrian-friendly, tree-lined streets and
pedestrian paths.
Obj. 2-4: Develop and enhanced pedestrian-bicycle route and trail
system connecting neighborhood parks, residential neighborhoods,
and commercial areas.
Downtown Sub Area Goals
Downtown Sub Area 2 Goal: Extend the historical Broadway
main street character into Sub-area 2.
Obj. 2-2: Enhance area with streetscape improvements and
attractive store fronts in order to restore a pedestrian-oriented, main
street character.
Downtown Sub Area 3 Goal: Transform the suburban, auto-
oriented character of sub-area 3 to a more pedestrian-
oriented character, with a stronger business mix.
Obj. 3-4: Explore new street configurations that create a safer and
more pleasant pedestrian experience.
B-2
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
EN GLEWOOD SOUTH BROADWAY
Strategies supporting multiple modes of transportation:
1. Support pedestrian-friendly developments with mixed land use of
sufficient scale to support neighborhoods and businesses. Reduce
vehicle miles traveled (VMT) thus reducing congestion, and indirectly
improving air and water quality. Create area on Broadway where
people could choose to live without owing a personal vehicle based
on excellent access to public transit employment, shopping and
recreation. Recognize and enhance the relationships between land
use and the transportation system.
1.1 Encourage and support mixed use projects with residential, office
and retailing components.
1.2 Enhance pedestrian and bicycle amenities and links to light rail
stations, bus stops, shopping and employment centers.
1.3 Enhance the accessibility of the transportation system.
1.4 Support and develop a balanced, multi-modal transportation
system that includes rapid transit, regional bus service, bike and
pedestrian facilities, and improvements to the existing roadway
systems.
1.5 Provide safe and direct crosswalk movements along Broadway.
Additional plans served as a base for
evaluating the bike and pedestrian network,
and identifying future on and off-street bike
facilities by location and type. The City's Parks
and Recreation Master Plan identifies primary
connections and an expansive off-street trail
network that fundamentally supports future on-
street bike and pedestrian improvements. The
Bicycle Plan Route Development Study and
Implementation Program resulted in a signed
network of bike routes that are the base
network in the City today. The Light Rail
Corridor Plan identified key projects for
enhanced bike facilities and connections that
were further studied in the Next Steps Study.
The City's Complete Street Toolbox also
informs facility types and pedestrian facility
recommendations within the city.
Eql.-od Complete Streets Toolboa
•
Englewood Ught Raft Corridor Plan
---··•------------. ,-...-•---·----&•~·-
~ :;:7:_
8-3
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Englewood Parks antf Reaatlon Master Plan
• ENGL E W OOD
FORWA R D
WALK Q,WHEEL
MASTFJ~ Pt.AN Q,t PR OGP.I\M
Existin g Infrastructure
•
The City of Englewood's bicycle transportation network today is
made up of locally signed bicycle routes and regionally signed bicycle
routes connecting Englewood to Denver, Littleton, Cherry Hills and
Sheridan. The off-street facilities consist primarily of bike and
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
movements along the length of these arterials make for an
uncomfortable walking and biking environment through the core of
the city, and inhibit connectivity between destinations.
pedestrian paths through city parks
and Mary Carter Greenway, and link
Englewood to the broader trail
network In Denver and Littleton.
There are currently 91 miles of
bicycle paths/trails and 42.6 miles of
on-street bicycle routes as shown
Figure B-1.
Figure B-1: Map of Current Bicycle Paths /Tra il s and On-Stre et Ro utes
Englewood's street grid is uniform
throughout the core of the city with
some variances in street pattern to
the west and south, at the edges with
Littleton. This street configuration is
the base of a uniform pedestrian
network with the majority of local or
neighborhood streets containing 3'
sidewalks along both sides of the
street. The city is bisected by
Broadway north-south and Hampden
Ave. east-west. These busy arterials
are barriers to easy bike and
pedestrian movement between
sections of the city and between
residential uses and retail/commercial
development. Traffic signals along
Broadway and Hampden provide
crossings but high traffic volumes,
driveway access and turning
B-4
' ·,' . / -
·. }. -~,:~"-L__; ;
. 1i.f•
-flle!on»IRoute
--Loc411 Ro1M -C0,01-
• I.If •• --
City of
Eng lewoo d,
co
Bi cy cle
Facllitles
Map •
E.LEWOOD
FORWAP D
WALK '.' WHEEL
..._,,\'..) U-1 t"'! liM "-"·{ 11 r,~~1p1. ,,
Bicycle Parking
Today, the City of Eriglewood has over 45 bicycle parking racks in
place within the community. The majority of these facilities are
located in high activity, high volume areas and include the Broadway
corridor from Yale Avenue south to Hamden Blvd., the Hospital
District and the Oxford and Civic Center LRT stations. The innovatory
of bicycle parking performed as part of the Walk and Wheel Study
identified current locations as illustrated in Figures B-2 and B-3.
Additionally, several bikes were observed in the northwest area of
the Hospital District locked to signposts or trees, and are indicated
on the maps in black. RTD bike lockers are available at the Civic
Center station for rental through RTD, but community concerns over
capacity of these lockers and availability indicate a need for a
different bike parking solution at this station.
• •
B-5
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Figure B-2: Bicycle Parking Locations in the City Center, Broadway
Corridor, and the Hospital District
,..,.
c,,c • ("1
/~ 000
~i.=r-
Figure B-3: Bicycle Parking Locations Near the Oxford LRT
Station and the Recreation Center
..
"' >< e
Mlll1r,P:lii
KENYON A
• • ENGLEWOOD
FORWARD
WALK &.WHEEL
MA.SiEH PLAN • PROGAAM
Pedestrian and Bicycle Counts
Counts of pedestrian and bicycle activity were performed at eleven
locations around the City from 7-10 am, llam-lpm, and 4-6pm to
determine the current level of pedestrian and bicycle activity. The
counts were performed in late October and early November 2014
during periods of nice weather. The locations were:
• Dartmouth at Broadway . Floyd at Broadway
• Oxford at Broadway
• Oxford at Navajo
• Clarkson at Old Hampden
• Inca at us 285
• Inca at Englewood Parkway . Elati at US 285
• Sherman/Little Dry Creek Trail/
• Sherman at US 285
• Belleview at Delaware
B-6
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Figure B-4: Pedestrian and Bicycle Counts Total
4000 -r------------------
3500 +---
3000 +---
2500
2000
1500
1000 -1----i
500 +----
Q -l----
-----------··--·-·
Pedestrians Bikes
Figure B-5: Average Number of Bicycle and Pedestrian
Counts Per Hour Over All Count Locations
500 ~-----------------
450 +---
400 -f---
350
300
250
200 +---
150 +---
100 +---
so -f---
0 -1----
Pedestrians Bikes
Figure B-6: Total Bicycle and Pedestrian Volumes at Each
Count Location
160 tl
lllOO · ag
1200
1000 ·
800
flU CI ·
400
110 I 20 0 • I a
.,,.,, :<-, ._,&-o ~ -~'f, ,~"' ~-<::, ef'·
'<; c),
~ $· ;/'
._e,~ ·l ''
"" ~'I,
<;f'<>
Figure B-7: Pedestrian and Bicycle Split
87%
■ Pedestrians
Bikes
• •
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
&lc~•cl es
■ J1l!destrlan~
iii ii
'o~ ~,t'-~"' 'I,~ .... ~ -~' -='~ ~ }r, i ~· e,.'f ... ~'S
'@~ <:,(, <, "
Figure B-8: Bicycle Intersection Preferences
34%
66%
B-7
: Bikes in
Crosswalk
Bikes in Traffic
Lanes
• • ENGLEWOOD !!)
F O R WA R D ~. r_~ ___ )
WALK &,WHEEL . ~/
MASTER PLAN PROGRAM
ISacyde Travel IDemand and level of Traffic Stress
The Bicycle Suitability Index (BSI) model utilizes existing
infrastructure (in a Geographic Information System (GIS) form) to
develop composite demand-side (where resident trips would typically
originate from and travel to) and supply-side (what physical
infrastructure exists) models of Englewood. Objective tools such as
this are utilized during the planning process to complement the more
subjective input received during public input sessions and project
team network evaluation exercises, as both are critical components
to developing a well-rounded data and input-driven plan.
Following is a description of the methods and results of Bicycle
Demand Analysis (demand side) and the Bicycle Level of Traffic
Stress Analysis (supply side). The analytical methods within provide
an objective, data-driven process of identifying network gaps as
potential projects and identifying areas of high existing or potential
bicycle and pedestrian activity. The resulting Supply and Demand
Typologies Model presents an array of potential bicycle and
improvement opportunities for Englewood.
Data Sources
The following data inputs were incorporated into the analysis. The
table below displays variables, its sources, and notes on limitations
of available data and assumptions made.
Table B-1: Data Inputs Information
----------,-----------,-------------~Model Input Source Notes , · ',
Posted Speed Englewood GIS data
Number of Travel JI Englewood !I GIS data
Bicycle Facilities Englewood GIS data + spot field
Demographic US Census 2010 Census Block
B-8
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
School Englewood School Various school web
Enrollment pages and discussions District with school personnel.
Transit Service RTD Boarding and LRT rail activity was
Alighting Data estimated
Traffic Englewood GIS data
Signal/Control
Models serve as an effective means to understand how factors In a
complex system interact by providing a simplified version of the
system for study. However, by definition, models are
representations of reality and are constrained by the quality of
available data and the complexity of the system under consideration.
Throughout the modeling process, significant effort was made to
collect the best data possible for input to the model and field verify
data as necessary and possible.
BSI provides a general understanding of expected activity in the
pedestrian environment by combining categories representative of
where people live, work, play, access public transit and go to school
into a composite sketch of demand.
Generally speaking, the scoring method is a function of density and
proximity. Scores reflect relative impact on walking or bicycling to
and from census block corners that are located adjacent to the
features used in the analysis. As such, scores are represented as
density patterns of points within a ¼ mile of each other.
Subsequently, the scores are effectively a result of two
complementing forces: distance decay -the effect of distance on
spatial interactions yields lower scores for features over ¼ mile away
from other features; and spatial density -the effect of closely
E.LEWOOD
F ORWAR D
clustered features yields higher scores. Scores will increase in high
feature density areas and if those features are close together.
Scores will decrease in low feature density areas and if features are
further apart. In essence, the score is the intersection of distance
and density. Thus, on the maps shown below, the highest
density/usage/activity locations (shown in red) do not represent
specific physical facilities, but rather represent relative higher use
zones as calculated above.
Categories are scored on a scale of 1 -5 based on density and
proximity and then assigned weighted multipliers to reflect the
relative influence categories have on pedestrian and bicycle activity.
The feature weighting method is discussed in the following section.
Where people live includes 2010 census block level population
density Information. These locations represent potential trip origin
locations. More trips can be made in areas with higher population
density if conditions are right. "Live" trip hot spots include areas in
the residential western-most arm of town, the northern end of town
along Floyd Street, and the larger areas east and west of Broadway
south of Hampden.
•
B-9
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Figure B-9: Where People Live Census 2010 Block Le'1el
Population Density
Where People Live
£:n q lrt \"IOO d , Co toradn Wnlk ,tlld Wl1 N~I
0 11;r1"!A!:IL1t\ff'i:s~•,,1,1 -""\..,i t 1J!l(tl11••LJ 1,r
0 w,rt,1 R,·IFt.1t,.;,r1 r 1 P11/o CJ......Ll::::.!:;5
t,o•.,11 11:!/"l1t1
1•:•'"rt•·.--.,,,._.,,.,J..,,..-....1::it• .. -•
1;,.,,..u-.,Jf'fi.,;.i.1 ,y.:.:o
• • ENGLEWOOD
FORWA R D
WALK it.WHEEL
MASTJ::R Pl.AN U{ PROCRAf..1
Where people work mainly represents trip ends, for people
working in Englewood regardless of residency. Its basis is 2010 total
employment by census block. Depending on the type of job, this
category can represent both trip attractors (i.e., retail stores or
cafes) and trip generators (i.e., office parks and office buildings) in
terms of base employment population. It is therefore also used in
the "where people play" category by overlaying with specific job
types, such as retail. Hot spots for the "work" analysis include the
area's shopping centers along Englewood Parkway/Girard Avenue
and south across Hampden, the Swedish Medical Center hospital,
and the newly redeveloped shopping center just east of University
Boulevard. The Broadway corridor is represented by moderate
employee density because employment is spread out along the
corridor, rather than clustered in a commercial shopping center.
8-10
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Figure B-10: Where People Work -T rip Ends for Peopl e of
Englewood Regardless of Residency
I
:ill I
flMlTMUl.r!>t /
I
I
~ I
Where People Work
Enqlewood, CoJnratJo Wal k a nd W hAAI
I
i
I
I
0 >i,;f•A.t.,1~\Hll•"-~'1 ............. 1,,1; tRO, ~t·,,
0 , , J"' n,1: !';t.11~,r l.,-l Pc1:~
-ur•,,...rt""• ,1.., c...,,'1,1 u,.,_,•-.~ ..
M. 1 r,t.,•♦ir~~ "¥-~'lfi
•
Figure B-11: Where People Learn -K-12, Community
College and University Enrollment
Where People Learn
EnglP.wood, Colomdo W.ilk anrl WhP.n l
L .:
C'l'l'it+O
,.,,..
~'
-~··~ itdihh) --
O •1or ~1.·t1111..-au,~.1-:v ""-..,. Li;;hl ~•·· i.1-,e
O 1'? ... RJll"'•'II"'• C P•-11
! .'(,!;.·)!
/l(f.\'")
c:c::c:::i:::r::,
I IJIJf"
~"''°d""" ••~l1'0flltt';,'-,W IJtC..·•·•• ,•~,1:u~..,1, .. ~. 1•,
B-11
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Where people learn represents where students K-12, at
community college, or at university go to school. Its basis is
enrollment data from the Englewood Public School District individual
school websites and information provided by district staff. As shown
on Figure B-11, Englewood Middle and High School Campus has the
greatest concentration of students and associated activity. In the
southern portion of town the proximity of four schools increases the
relative intensity of activity. Higher order streets, like Broadway are
likely to act as barriers and reduce actual observed activity.
• • ENGL E W OOD
FORWA R D
WALK fJ,WHEE L
MASTF..R Pl.AN(_\;_ ;:>QQQ~AM
Where people shop and play is a combination of varied land use
types and destinations. Overlays such as retail destinations, regional
trails and parks contribute to this category. Regional trails travelling
through Englewood were considered as parks in this analysis due to
their recreational draw. Specific trailhead connections and locations
will be strongly considered in the network recommendations due to
public emphasis on trail connection desirability. These destinations
are important and have higher activity due to the shorter term
nature of these visits (typical duration of these visits is less than one
half a day) and because they are likely to attract a wide variety of
people who are likely to visit multiple destinations in close proximity.
"Play and shop" hotspots identified in this analysis include retail in
the Englewood Plaza/Englewood Marketplace area, retail and
entertainment along Broadway and shopping centers along
Hampden Avenue, as well as parks like Bellevue Park and trails along
the South Platte River.
B-12
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Figure IB -12: W here People Sh op and Play
. .
Where Peop le Play a nd Sh op
EnglBWoo d, Colorado Walk a nd VJh(l,,I
I
:
' .......
0 H,,;ih ,-1,.h,ltr !.lu• .;.10 ► "'-..,. l <.hi .Gd'-:.,_.,_
0 u-1•! ff•-l Sta1,ar, c:J ,..,m,
l r~~·"
E.L E WOO D
FOR W ARD
•-•~ -
Figure B-13: Where People Access Transit
Q)
1 ~
Wh ere Pe ople Access Tra nsit
En ')law'lod. Colo ro{fo Wtt lk nrut Wtu ,,•I
0 •{gtiA<.thi•l· .. 1;~~~fJ "'-.... Lt_qM R/J !:l!ll":'
0 .•.J"l'fU1 !1-IJ\·•f' 1'11'11'
•
c:; t t H#i
,, ··~,..-~.,,,,. ... t _, ...... , \•~ .... , .•
. ,, ... , ... ~' >.t' .-,·y ,, •
8-13
•
September 2 , 2015 I Final Draft
Where people access transit is assessed by location of bus stops
and light rail stops. Stops with greater observed activity were
weighted more heavily utilizing boarding data from the Regional
Transit District (RTD). Use data was not available for the light rail
stations and so an activity estimate was made based on a portion of
adjacent bus boarding volumes. It is important to understand that,
because potential bicycle and pedestrian destinations consider
adjacencies and density of destinations (in this case, locations such
as bus stops), this analysis considers not only the relative use
(boarding data) for each stop, but analyzes each stop's proximity to
other stops and other lines, creating hot spots base d on both
proximity and use. In this case , th e Broadway/Civic Center core,
light rail stations, and Hampden Avenue are identified as "hot spots."
•
Composite Demand. Figure 8-14 shows the potential composite
demand analysis for Englewood, which was developed by overlaying
the factor maps and applying standard weights to each factor. This
analysis shows that the highest potential for bicycle travel demand is
along the Broadway Corridor, Hampden Avenue/Englewood
Parkway/Girard Avenue corridor, areas near the light rail stations
and the cluster of schools in southeast Englewood. It is also
important that future bicycle and pedestrian improvements consider
connectivity between the hot spots shown on this composite map.
B-14
•
September 2, 2015 I Fi nal Draft
Figure B-14: Composite Demand
I
I r
i
"""' I
f
I
Cffl':"l:•NOQ I .......
Composite Potential Demand
Englewood, Cnlorodo Walk a nd Wheel
-
0 H;;it1 A~t111:.,ot.i.St':.1;J "'"'-l •.ihl R.ttl urw
0 d l1~k••I Sllt lo0n
L ~n<!:
Al.'l -~1 •1
cc~ ~i;;.a
o.a•~o,.t ... ,..,,/11',,lif'l ~•(;S C.-,11•-,
f'.. .. •!'"'•~, .. -.iy.,!'111
E.LEWOOD
FORWA!~D
Level of Traffic Stress Analysis
The methods used for the Level of Traffic Stress Analysis were
adapted from the 2012 Mineta Transportation Institute (MTI) Report
11-19: Low-Stress Bicycling and Network Connectivity. The approach
outlined in the MTI report uses roadway network data, including
posted speed limit, the number of travel lanes, and the presence and
character of bicycle lanes, as a proxy for bicyclist comfort level. Road
segments are classified into one of four levels of traffic stress (LTS)
based on these factors. The lowest level of traffic stress, LTS 1, is
assigned to roads that would be tolerable for most children to ride,
and could also be applied to multi-use paths that are separated from
motorized traffic (not shown in this analysis); LTS 2 roads are those
that could be comfortably ridden by the mainstream adult
population; LTS 3 is the level assigned to roads that would be
acceptable to current "enthused and confident" bicyclists; and LTS 4
is assigned to segments that are only acceptable to "strong and
fearless" bicyclists, who will tolerate riding on roadways with higher
motorized traffic volumes and speeds.
A bicycle network is likely to attract a large portion of the population
if its fundamental attribute is low stress connectivity. In other
words, a network should provide direct routes between origins and
destinations that do not include links that exceed one's tolerance for
traffic stress. The 851 is an objective, data-driven evaluation model
which identifies high traffic stress links, bicycle network gaps and
gaps between "low stress" links, and a score assessing the relative
user comfort or level of stress a user may experience on each link is
mapped. Each user is different and will tolerate different levels of
stress in their journey so these maps should be used as a general
guide rather than an absolute truth.
•
8-15
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Table B-2: Methods for the Level of Traffic Stress Anal
LTS 1
LTS2
LTS 3
Presenting little traffic stress and demanding little attention from
cyclists, and attractive enough for a relaxing bike ride. Suitable for
almost all cyclists, including children trained to safely cross
intersections. On links, cyclists are either physically separated
from traffic, or are in an exclusive bicycling zone next to a slow
traffic stream with no more than one lane per direction, or are on
a shared road where they interact with only occasional motor
vehicles (as opposed to a stream of traffic) with a low speed
differential. Where cyclists ride alongside a parking lane, they
have ample operating space outside the zone into which car
doors are opened. Intersections are easy to approach and cross.
Presenting little traffic stress and therefore suitable to most adult
cyclists but demanding more attention than might be expected
from children. On links, cyclists are either physically separated
from traffic, or are in an exduslve bicycling zone next to a well-
confined traffic stream with adequate clearance from a parking
lane, or are on a shared road where they interact with only
occasional motor vehicles (as opposed to a stream of traffic) with
a low speed differential. Where a bike lane lies between a through
lane and a right-turn lane, it is configured to give cyclists
unambiguous priority where cars cross the bike lane and to keep
car speed in the right-turn lahe comparable to bicycling speeds.
Crossings are not difficult for most adults.
More traffic stress than LTS 2, yet markedly less than the stress of
integrating with multilane traffic, and therefore welcome to many
people currently riding bikes in American cities. Offering cyclists
either an exclusive riding zone (lane) next to moderate-speed
traffic or shared lanes on streets that are not multi lane and have
moderately low speed. Crossings may be longer or across higher-
speed roads than allowed by L TS 2, but are still considered
acceptably safe to most adult pedestrians.
L TS 4 jj A level of stress beyond L TS 3.
Source: Mineta Transportation Institute Report 11-19
• • ENGLEWOOD
FORWA R D
WALK &WHEEL
/'t.llA..(,Tl=A Pl.A~ PAOCiMM ~
Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (L TS) Analysis Results
Segment Analysis
The results of the segment-based LTS are shown below. Much of the
network consists of disconnected clusters of low-stress (LTS 1 to 2)
streets, shown in green and yellow. Individually, these islands of
low-stress streets are comfortable to ride for most adults, but they
are isolated from one another by larger roads with higher traffic
speeds that disrupt bicycle mobility. Higher order roadways like
Hampden Avenue, Broadway, and Santa Fe act as barriers to
bicyclists.
8-16
•
September 2, 2015 I Fina l Draft
Figure B-15: Level of Traffic Stress
Level of Traffic Stress
Englewood, Colorado Wulk and Wheel
Lih(lforTUlfl"tC SU..,, ,lT!il r8 111011aw•y c.l•~~tllllfln "-YWVl'I
f,)r !hit trnlfto drnH lD!ell!:llt'e ct frlf' l~c>,'1';r~, por:..:•t ·Q(l f,ich
lTS COlffillCOml~ k, ct pd:t,et,l:.r 11rc.-u;.i ofl1'1 ~ populm0t
l•fln-ftcllll{j1•1'l
:nt.•a•r ,11e41r1a.11J'l f.'t'pu/,.t,Qt1
:3} Erithu~a MU c.Ut'r,C,,l'N pupJ "uoll
-'1 S'rtlng .lll\\"1 foiltlf'H,1 flO\'llil~hon
._,,__,,....,.. .... ...,..,bl..__,
, 1ta
. a
0 ~1t;11Ad~(!y!JUl.6kp ~ l•1Jhl'1:tll'l.111c LTS
--1tLo.-.1
a LEWOOD
FO R W ARD
. WALK ? WHEEL
"lt\~T(I., I ·, AN 1_-!. P F't Jr ,p ,•~•
•
Figure B·16: Level of Traffic Stress• Connectivity Analysis
Level of Traffic Stress -
Conn ectivity Analysis
Fnnrewooct, Col orado W"lk and Wt u:•"'
l evttl c! na"ir. !stl'tU (L'!S ~ Ill 8 IOlffl.'l'll y cJ1,i:,'.'lk.tlCfl 9'f l\4l'f'I
fOf 1h11 tr,1:c lb~t• ~.me. ol thll ix,-ctii, pupu',t.or F ■e~
L I fl QUIOlll)Oft!Ja lo • ~'!.1<;\,111 ' g ,°'IIJ Ct tt)O pcJJUltlttorl
1)Mnltr.~•n
2\ Mi .,,lil!il~f'I tldU't ~u·-,t,:>1'
~• (MIIUMl'l ltfl.:I COl'l Mtmt flO;Jtl,l1t~,r1
41 ~ffl'Hl(l •'Yt lot11".-r1t1 :":&.11.\'•'l'"
The LTfl A1•0t~t•tl It, l~d (l'l !"'IC M n~l& Trll."lfJj -'Jl'\u+'.·I'
lttll hf'9ce ;..o,;, l i1.,.•'il;c:t;,1 Hto::-~i lflQ: •nit Nooi.n •k Cl'l!lllt:!:tl'1'1l j
""""
0 'IIIJf'.Arl",•hAw,i\!oµ ""'-" L•t,htR,1,1 lhtr LTS
0 ,;1 •1•\,l r,,1 f ~.t!"'" r:::J p,., ..
.t
-,.~1;.w ,
.,.,ll•ulJt~~.-J1lC-IIO ~.f .. 't• ;.>(I \,.!I C.,..,~
·•~;, U<t t!:o\l l \M-: '• •!I'
B-17
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Connectivity Analysis
While major roadways act as barriers along the roadways and at
unsignalized crossings, signals provide a connection for cyclists to
move between low-stress neighborhood roadways. Outside of this
central core, however, low-stress roads have been built without
connectivity across major roadways, making travel between
neighborhoods inaccessible to most adults. This display makes
apparent the gaps in the bicycle network that could be targeted for
improvements to create connected bicycling routes that are
comfortable for the mainstream adult population. Along with
improvements along high -stress corridors, safe crossing
opportunities across those corridors will greatly increas e bicycling
mobility.
Bicycle Suitability Index Conclusions
BSI provided a picture of several phenomena:
1. Geographic variation in demand -potential activity levels at
different Census block corners
2. Geographic variation in supply -the quality of the physical
pedestrian and bicycle network
Variation in demand and supply are combined into the Composite
BSI models. A list of possible bicycle and improvement options is
summarized below.
• Areas with high demand for bicycling and high supply of suitable
infrastructure can benefit from innovative programs and capital
projects that further support bicycling, closure of key gaps, and
should be considered showcase areas where best practices can
be modeled for the region. These areas provide cost-effective
opportunities for improvements and should be high priority for
investment.
• Areas with high demand and low supply of suitable infrastructure
can benefit from infrastructure improvements to improve
bicycling conditions. These areas may require bicycle facilities or
Intersection Improvements to accommodate high level of
demand. They should also be high priority for investment.
• Areas with low demand for bicycling and high supply of suitable
Infrastructure can benefit from programs to encourage bicycling
and land use changes or development to Increase the density of
attractors and generators. These areas should be medium
priority for investment.
• Areas with low demand for bicycling and low supply of suitable
infrastructure can benefit from basic infrastructure
improvements. These areas should be low-priority for
investments.
8-18
Bicyde encouragement programs;
high Investment priority
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
nnovatlve design treatmMU,
dosure of key gap-.; high
investment priority
Model-Based
Recommendations
Basic infrastructure improvements;
low investment priority
Invest in infrastructure to meet
demand; high investment priority
Overall the areas of highest demand for bicycling are centered on
Broadway Corridor, Hampden Avenue/Englewood Parkway/Girard
Avenue, areas near the light rail stations and the cluster of schools in
southeast Englewood. Other areas of Englewood are characterized
by more modest potential demand.
Most adult cyclists can circulate comfortably on local and minor
collector roadways. Higher order roadways, with speeds exceeding
30 miles per hour, such as Hampden and Federal, typically act as
barriers to blcycling when appropriate bicycle facilities are not
provided. Bike lanes can decrease the level of traffic stress on
several of Englewood's roadways, but enhancing the facilities with
bike lane buffers or vertical separation from traffic while also
providing a continuous dedicated facility on higher speed or higher
volume roadways will further enhance the bicycling experience for all
users. Within Englewood, islands of connected facilities exist.
Concentrating short term facility construction on gap closure
between these islands can significantly increase bicycling access
within Englewood and help the city realize the full potential of a safe,
continuous and connected bicycling network.
c. Community and
Stakeholder
Engagement
Open and transparent community engagement and public
participation were key elements in the process of developing the
Plan. The goal of the community engagement and outreach process
was to increase public awareness of biking and walking in
Englewood and to promote community participation in the study
process. Public input was solicited throughout the entire study
process, and in coordination with the other concurrent planning
studies; the Comprehensive Plan update and the Next Steps Study.
Project management team meetings were held on a regular basis
and coordination between the three planning processes was
essential to success.
The public process for the Walk and Wheel Master Plan included two
community workshops; stakeholder focus group and interviews;
website, e-newsletter and email blasts; online questionnaire;
meetings with school district; and participation in the comprehensive
plan coordinated outreach.
•
C-1
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Englewood Forward Branding a nd
Communications
• Brand/Logo/Templates: An overall project brand with logos
and templates were produced to give a similar look and feel
between online and print materials across all projects.
ENG L EW O D
FORWARD
WALK ") WHEE L
MAS T ER PLAN _ _,' P ROGRAM
■ Website: Project materials, meeting notes, public meeting
announcements and materials, and general project information
was available through the project website at:
www.englewoodforward.org.
■ Contact Database (Stakeholder/Public): A contact
database was developed for Englewood Forward as a whole with
specific bike and pedestrian contacts updated on an ongoing
basis.
l?1UJ1t»m:: Meetollil gs
Two public meetings were held to garner support for the planning
process and gain public perspective on the vision of the plan,
community choices and review of the final plan. At each of the public
meetings, attendees read informational boards exhibiting recent
analysis for future demand for walking and biking in Englewood; and
learned about potential pedestrian and bicycle facility types and
engaged in discussion over a large scale map of the city, noting their
particular interests or concerns. The project team gathered key
information on the improvements or changes in facilities that would
make biking or walking more comfortable and encourage a greater
number of residents to do so.
The Public Meetings Included:
• Vision Workshop / Initial Project Kick-off Meeting I November
12, 2014
• Community Choices Workshop -held in conjunction with the two
concurrent planning projects I February 11, 2015
C-2
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Public meetings were advertised through the sources listed below to
ensure input was gained from a broad range of community leaders,
agencies, elected officials, citizens and organizations that have an
interest in the outcome of the studies:
a Englewood Citizen
11 E-Notifier sent out by City
• Postcard mailers
a Press Releases
• Quarterly Englewood Forward E-Newsletters
p Facebook
" Englewood Herald
• Your Hub weekly
• Chamber of Commerce
" Next Door
Flyers at bike organizations, bike shops, library, coffee shops,
etc.
-~ ,:.-r .---.---"••·
E.LEWOOD
F O RW ARD
Key Them es
• 60% of Englewood Public Meeting Attendees Would Walk or Bike
More Frequently if Facilities Were Improved
• Use new bike facilities to reinvigorate Downtown Englewood and
pull people from south Denver neighborhoods into this
retail/restaurant/entertainment core
• Establish East-West Bicycle and Pedestrian Connections from
LRT Stations to Commercial and Residential Areas
• Link City Center LRT Station to the Broadway/Downtown Area
with a Strong Bicycle and Pedestrian Spine
• Improve Pedestrian Access Along and Across Broadway and in
the Medical District
• Link Areas West of Santa Fe and Railroad Tracks to Core
Community
• Ensure Safe Bicycle and Pedestrian Access to Schools
• Improve Off-Street Trail System and Connections to Trails
Connectivity
Establish east-west bicycle and pedestrian connections from LRT
stations to commercial and residential areas; north-south bicycle
and pedestrian connections along Broadway
• Link City Center LRT Station to Broadway/Downtown Area with a
Strong Bicycle and Pedestrian Spine
• Link Areas West of Santa Fe and Railroad Tracks to Core
Community
• Improve Off-Street Trail System and Connections to Trails
• Improve connectivity at Oxford
• Improved route to the Platte Park area and to Denver
• Improving bike facilities along Bates would capture the Denver
audience -excellent and safe alternative to riding on Dartmouth;
connects east-west to Galapago and ties over to the Greenway
connection at Dartmouth
• Franklin Street has always worked well as a connection from the
east
Eastman is a better bike path with less traffic and it connects to
Cushing Park, unlike Floyd
•
C-3
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
• Tejon or Zuni should be a north -south bikeway in the northwest
area of Englewood
• Southwest Greenbelt needs to connect through Rotolo Park and
Jason Park up to a facility on Oxford or a pedestrian crossing on
Oxford up to the Oxford Station to link the southern part of
Englewood safely to LRT
• Regional connections with Littleton and Denver are important to
making biking successful in Englewood
Infrastructure and Wayfinding
• Add more bike racks, bike boxes at Oxford station -Boulder and
Rina models for bike security
• Bike facility on Oxford: Increase width or separate bike lane on
Oxford; Protected bikeway along Oxford to get cyclists to the
Platte River Trail; Two-way bike path on north side of Oxford
tied to the Rec Center
• Bike facility on Dartmouth: replace on-street parking with bike
lanes
Logan better location for advanced bike facility than Clarkson
On-street bike facility on Bates and Galapago to compliment
pending rezoning of the properties at Galapago and new General
Iron Works Trail
• Iconic pedestrian bridge like Downtown Denver to link Civic
Center Station to west side of Santa Fe
• Raised crossing over Oxford to connect to the light rail platform
• Improved pedestrian facilities along Broadway with improved
land uses to make it a destination
• Improve Southwest Greenbelt trail
• Build the Englewood Rail Trail!
• Signage on Little Dry Creek system, to LRT Station and within
downtown -signage or painted lanes to show continuous
connection of trail and street and General Iron Works Trail and
Dartmouth link
• Signage or bike lanes along Floyd to access the LRT station
• Better pedestrian way-finding and signage in Downtown and
increased visibility of the downtown area
• Additional way-finding signage should be developed with more
descriptive detail -no one knows what E-9a is
• Maps or kiosks with signage and directions to destinations and
trail intersections
• Recreational path on one side/commuter path on the other side
of Mary Carter bike path
Safety and Access
• Improve pedestrian access: along and across Broadway and in
the Medical District -more visible crosswalks; improve crossing
at Broadway and 285; green paint or bike box at Floyd and
Broadway to avoid conflicts between right-turning cars from
west-bound Floyd and bikers; safer connection at
Inca/Dartmouth, 285/Santa Fe; Jason/Mansfield needs an RRFB
light; ped. crossing Santa Fe/Oxford; ped. crossing Santa
Fe/Dartmouth; safer crossing at Oxford to the Rec Center; better
ped. crossing on Bates/Logan for safer access to Bates Park
D Ensure safe bicycle and pedestrian access to schools
• Improve the three underpasses of Little Dry Creek Trail with
lighting and natural feel elements
• Improve the crossing at Englewood Parkway and Cherokee
a Crossing Hampden is hard to impossible on a bike unless you are
at a major street -model what Glendale did with Birch Street
• Traffic light needed at Kenyon/Jason
• Increase cycling's visibility in Englewood through education and
events
• Observance of traffic laws leads to safety and respect for both
user types
• Host bike event in Englewood like a Criterium race or a Cyclovia
• Consistent removal of debris on roadways and from snow
removal
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
C-4
Focused Outreach
Senior Center Community Holiday Bazaar I The Walk and
Wheel Master Plan was
represented during the
Englewood Holiday
Bazaar at the O'Malley
Senior Center to engage
the senior population and
gather input and opinions
on key issues. The
attendees viewed project
maps and displays and
discussed the project
with the team .
Stakeholder Interviews I In-depth interviews were conducted
with key stakeholders to gain understanding of stakeholder
perceptions, key issues and opportunities. Stakeholders interviewed:
Englewood School District, South Broadway Businesses, Englewood
Transportation Advisory Committee.
Englewood Walking and Wheeling Citizen Focus Group I City
Staff and the Project Team Consultants identified a select group of
Englewood Wheeling and Walking Enthusiasts based on board
service, meeting attendance, career vocation, and advocacy work.
The citizen focus group consisted of South Broadway business
owners, Englewood city staff and community residents. The purpose
of the Focus Group was to introduce the preliminary study findings,
and to solicit input on identifying and prioritizing preferences for
implementation of bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure projects.
• •
C-5
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Walk and Wheel Festiva l
The Walk and Wheel Festival was held on Saturday, June 23rd from
1:00-5:00 pm. The festival served as both a public meeting to
present the final Walk and Wheel Master Plan network to the
community, as well as a community celebration providing education
and awareness of health and well-being in Englewood. The following
agencies, organizations and businesses participated in the event:
• Kaiser Permanente
• Englewood School District
• Museum of Outdoor Art
• Brew on Broadway
Brewpub
• Bicycle Colorado
• Englewood Police
Department
• Englewood Wastewater
• Keep Englewood Beautiful
• Englewood Library
• Lifetime Fitness
• Yoga Tree/East West
Professionals
• Swedish Hospital
The Walk and Wheel Festival
included numerous outreach,
educational programming and awareness activities, including: a
bicycle facility demonstration to enable residents to test new facility
types recommended in the plan such as protected bike lanes and
sharrows; a bike rodeo to demonstrate bike safety, facilitated by
Bicycle Colorado; gardening and fitness demonstrations; free chair
massages; and health information from Kaiser Permanente. In
addition, both the Next Steps and Englewood Comprehensive Plan
teams were present to discuss updates and progress for each of the
plans.
• ENGLEWOOD
FORWARD
w AL K&WH_E_EL _
MASTER F'I..AN l PROGAM-"
Outreach Activities at Walk and Wheel Festiva l
Education and Programming
• •
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
• •
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Bike Facilities and Demonstration
C-7
E.LEWOOD
FOR W ARD
D. Plan Recommendations
The framework for plan recommendations is built on the findings of
the conditions and demand assessment and the input of the
Englewood community and stakeholders. The framework
emphasizes a primary bike and pedestrian connection east-west
from Englewood Civic Center LRT Station to the Broadway
retail/commercial corridor and east to the hospital district; east-west
crossings of Broadway to link destinations
especially within the core of the community;
enhancements along Broadway and
perpendicular local streets to enable
comfortable pedestrian movement from
residential areas to commercial uses; linkages
to south Denver; linkages between the rail
stations and connections west to trails and
recreational uses at Dartmouth, Oxford and
potentially near Civic Center.
Areas of Emphasis
The key emphasis of the recommendations is
to encourage additional walking and biking
trips in Englewood through the creation of a
low stress travel network for bicycling, and the
provision of enhanced pedestrian facilities and
way finding signage for comfortable
pedestrian mobility. The implementation of
greater pedestrian visibility, street markings
and dedicated space, coupled with way-finding
signage is fundamental to establishing a
stronger pedestrian environment within the
community. Improved bike facilities such as
bike boulevards and protected bike lanes are
! ,
' I
• •
D-1
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
identified as means of increasing ridership and encouraging the 60%
of Englewood riders who would be inclined to cycle if more
comfortable facilities were developed. Examples of these types of
improvements are described below.
• • ENGLEWOOD
FORW ARD
WALK j(-WH e·E_L_
MJ\STFJ~ Pl AN i.A t-'M"£)QA ,.!'-'
Pedestrian Facility Typologies
Improved Pedestrian Corridor I This facility type is characterized
by the presence of 5' or wider sidewalks on both sides of the street
improved crossings of major streets with bulbouts, enhanced
crosswalks, or other signing devices as necessary, and local
destination way finding signage. They provide primary corridors for
pedestrian mobility around the City.
D-2
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Priority Pedestrian Corridor I This facility type is intended to be
used in high pedestrian traffic areas in more commercial and retail
areas of the City. It is characterized by enhanced intersection
treatments such as colored crosswalks, bulbouts, special pedestrian
signalization and timing, the installation of medians and mid~block
crosswalks, and sidewalks of at least 8' in width on both sides of the
road. Sidewalk areas would preferably be 13'~16' wide to
accommodate a wide sidewalk, and an amenity zone.
E.LEWOO D
FOR W ARD
WALK \,WHEEL
•.1i\.:.1Hi I ! t1:1 '-.... i·'" .•;1,\•.•
Bicycle Facility Typologies
Bikeway I A bikeway is a roadway that has some form of markings
and signage installed to indicate to drivers and cyclists how to
Interact and that bikes are to be expected here. Bikeways can
include shared lane markings, bike lanes, or buffered bike lanes as
space allows and traffic volumes and speeds dictate.
Protected Bikeway I A protected bikeway is characterized by the
addition of some form of raised vertical element between the cyclists
travel area and the vehicular travel area and they are restricted to
bicycle use only so a separate pedestrian facility is provided as well.
Examples of vertical elements are flexible posts, roadside planters,
vertical curbs, and parked vehicles, among others. Studies have
shown that cyclists feel more comfortable on a protected bikeway
than a non-protected bikeway and this encourages more people to
ride their bikes.
• •
D-3
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Bike Boulevard I A bike boulevard is a low volume, low speed
street where bicycle travel is emphasized over automobile travel.
Traffic calming elements are often installed on bike boulevards
including diverters, chicanes, and bulb outs. The idea is to
encourage automobile drivers to use the street only for local access
and to allow for uninterrupted through movements for bicycles thus
encouraging bicycle use and creating a safe and bicycle friendly
environment. Bike boulevards also have improved way finding
signage listing destinations and the distances and travel times to
reach them by bike or by waling. Bike boulevard corridors are also
good places for implementing Improved Pedestrian Corridors as
described on the previous page.
Bicycle Parking
Throughout the planning process, Englewood residents expressed
frustration over the bike lockers found today at the Civic Center LRT
station. The rental of the lockers limits availability of bike storage at
the station, and turnover is extremely low. Consideration should be
given to a higher capacity secure bicycle parking facility at both the
Civic Center and Oxford Stations.
Secure bicycle parking, which is a locked structure that is protected
from the elements, is a growing trend across the country and transit
agencies are beginning to incorporate secure bicycle parking facilities
into station area plans. Secured bicycle parking facilities at Civic
Center and/or Oxford Stations would work in conjunction with
recommended bicycle facility improvements to Oxford Ave. and Floyd
Ave, and would increase visibility and accessibility of bike parking.
Providing secure bike parking at light rail stations encourages
greater use of bicycles as a means of transportation and serves to
activate commercial and retail spaces surrounding station areas. In
addition, secured bike parking facilities reduce the fear of theft and
deter cyclists from locking bikes in undesired locations.
Prefabricated bike cages are modular, which would allow Englewood
to add additional facilities over time as demand increases.
•
September 2 , 2015 I Final Draft
D-4
Infrastructure Recommendations
Figure D-1 (next page) shows the infrastructure recommendations
for pedestrians and bicycles for the entire City of Englewood. They
are based on public and stakeholder comment, the existing condition
assessment, and the level of traffic stress and bicycle demand
analyses as well as looking at continuity with facilities in adjacent
jurisdictions.
The map in Figure D-1 has several key improvements for pedestrian
and bicycle travel in the City and are listed in the following section.
• •
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
0-5
figure D-1: Infrastructure Recommendations for
Pedestrians and Bicycles for Englewood
r~·J.:..;;~h,j.
I 1.-,r--"}oo,
-.----,--,i!-
!···· i
,•" I ~....:-,..:..,....,+t--..o½~-~r
-i% ...... 1 ·, ' •
i ..... i • . : :,""_'J::·: , I··
••,;;, ... _, ~:
t-,--~ .............. =-'~),~. __ -_ ...,.._:-!! r-El ~
;},:\::,· , r •
~--!!----,=~:·~ --~,.r PropoHd Ov•rp•■
◊ Mid Block C,osalng
lnlilniectlon lmprovanMnt
--Pr1oflty Ped•1n,11n Co"ldor
lml)fOYltd Pl'dHlrlln Corridor
.. i.;._ tr·
r
· --s11c•w•y ·,
, .~ --Protaetnd Blkeway
---BlhBoulevud
r---:; -EJJ•llng Ttlll
,/ uuu Propo,ed Trail
/ ~•· . CJ City or Eng!owood ~~ "', • ........ fl LAT Stop
D-6
0
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
E.LEWOO O
FOR W ARD
WALK • WHEEL
M,h I I{ i, l,t,1 I -~ Pl', ,C,\'.'
Transformative Projects
The following projects are anticipated to have a transformative effect
on Englewood's pedestrian and bicycle system and are anticipated to
catalyze other improvements in the City .
Transformative Pedestrian Improvements
• Broadway corridor from US 285 to Dartmouth: this corridor is
identified as a Priority Pedestrian Corridor in the Plan. Key
connectivity improvements include installing pedestrian-scale
way finding signage, strengthening the connections between
Broadway and the adjacent neighborhoods, installing mid-block
crossings between Hampden and Girard at the mid-block
pedestrian paseos and between Floyd and Eastman at the Gothic
Theatre.
■ Enhance pedestrian scale way finding signage between City
Center LRT Station and the hospital district: signage that
identifies key local destinations and guides pedestrians between
the LRT station and the hospital district with expected travel
time and distances will reinforce the active transportation links in
this corridor and encourage more people to walk in this area.
■ Improved pedestrian corridors along Kenyon, Sherman, and
Bannock: these corridors are intended to provide low stress
connections between neighborhoods and schools, commercial
districts, and civic uses to encourage walking trips.
Transformative Bicycle Improvements
• Protected bikeway loop: located along Oxford,
Sherman/Clarkson, and Floyd this facility will provide a low
stress connection through the heart of Englewood and is
anticipated t o attract significantly more users and be a key
community asset once in place. The City of Sheridan is also
planning on making improvements to Oxford west of Santa Fe to
allow for a continuous protected bikeway connection between
the two cities.
•
D-7
•
September 2 , 2015 I Final Draft
• Bicycle improvements to Dartmouth: Dartmouth currently has
the highest level of bicycling activity of locations observed in the
City and primarily serves bicycle commuters. It also traverses the
entire City from east to west making it an important connection
for Englewood . Dartmouth west of the Platte River is envisioned
as an off street or protected bikeway facility linking west
Englewood to the Mary Carter Greenway and the Little Dry Creek
Trail that extends east to Inca. East of the Platte River
Dartmouth is envisioned to be an on-street facility to serve
bicycle commuters and to communicate to automobile drivers
and bicyclists that they should expect each other on the road in
this area. The parallel protected bikeway facility on Floyd east of
Inca is intended to serve a wider cross section of bicyclists and is
intended to complement the Dartmouth improvements and to
prov ide a low stress connection to Inca and the little Dry Creek
Trail.
■ Rail Trail along LRT line: This facility provides an off street
experience for pedestrians and bicyclists to travel the length of
Englewood and to connect to key destinations. The first portion
of this trail being evaluated for implementation is the section
from the Big Dry Creek Trail to Oxford Station.
Other Key Recommendation s
In order to better illustrate the infrastructure recommendations, we
have div ided the City into 4 quadrants for better map visibility in this
document. A discussion of the key recommendations in each
quadrant is included.
• ENGLEWOOD
FORWA R D
WALK ◊ WH-EEL.
11.1:...~li=J? Pi A"'J (\( PJ:fOOIU-.M
NW Quadrant
--·-V'f AMthaRS r AW:.
~
) WILll'FAIJI,
.,,
~~'l'OolTF.S A.\/
-•··-(!.-,,
I
... ~IU.elLLAVE ~;,
1
_
... I •. , ~I
~~ PropoaedOVwfpM•
◊ ~~B~ilOontni,
1"· !o
' 1=:
I
;I
~ A,~lr'f-rt 'HIIJ
'l
-;:: tntffHC:Uonlinpr-0'/lHfltnt
--Priotlt)' Ptdntftan comdor
.. b' ·~~ I ! ; ~ FLO't'DAV_,~,
0
~-
0
.::" ..... -• ....i.,;l,'(,llj:.+,,----,,~
.!i!!!"J ---~ ~d P~1n Con1dor ··--· S -Procaeted BIHWQY ---.. -E..lsthtgn.tU
IA: ■uu, Pf'V~d Tro!I
i r::::J City OfEnglft'Cod
~ l!J 1.RTStop
& .... ...
~ .. ... , ___ ,..
1 0 1.a 2MO
~
9
I
• "' I ,
I
•
I
tal 1'r,:')r,11i!L ·-ii-. -~i'-
D-8
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Key pedestrian recommendations:
• Improve the existing Harvard Gulch Trail
segment in Englewood by replacing the current
asphalt pavement with concrete pavement and
creating a parallel soft surface trail for walkers
and joggers.
Add continuous sidewalk of at least 5' in width
along Dartmouth Ave to provide for a connection
to the Mary Carter Greenway and the Little Dry
Creek Trail.
Key bicycle recommendations:
Create a north-south bikeway on Zuni St
connecting west Englewood with Denver,
Sheridan, the Mary Carter Greenway near River
Point, and proposed improved bike facilities on
Dartmouth Ave.
• Dartmouth Ave protected bikeway
improvements west of Santa Fe Dr. to connect
neighborhoods in the northwest area to the
Mary Carter Greenway, to downtown Englewood
and east to commercial/retail along Broadway.
• A future bikeway along Wesley Ave to connect
to the Mary Carter Greenway and planned
Denver improvements near the Evans LRT
station.
• A new Mary Center Trail segment on the east
side of the Platte River between Oxford Ave and
Iliff Ave.
SW Quadrant
IFI -•-••
◊ M14 llodl CtDHlng
~~_c.l,TE,_:1',~.?~ ~.:\ r '" ! !
• •
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
·') t~lon lmpr<WfflltM
-Pnorftyl'flNttrianCamdor
fmpn:rnd Pedfftrtan Con1dor
•l W"U<, .. W II GFL :.::!,/ i itf,eil'.1!,_,._..,_l-
:::::::" .. j~ _ _j __ ,~_:: i . ..J·-j:~~---~;t-,~-LJ,l.~~k] Key pedestrian recommendations:
I
-Blk9WIY
' -Ptotectld BHlaway
, -Biko 8ouWnrd
, -bllflng natl
I ...... PJQPOMd TAil
·•c:JCltyO<E-
s fl LRTStop
~ School •-p ... --.-; . .;.,,...
0 t,000 J,tN
r ·• I(:
1.wut11·1 11"-"'J;:
I ,:
_•N•."l!''Ll'~l '(
\ I '1.1\t'el'f'~j\~ : ltal'.>f.111-~ ,. ... ---~--·-····--
... ,
_:"r1,Nro
D-9
• Implement an improved pedestrian corridor along
Irving St in conjunction with the City of Sheridan
and the City of Denver.
• Implement an improved pedestrian corridor along
Federal Blvd in conjunction with the City of
Sheridan and the City of Denver.
• Work cooperatively with the City of Sheridan to
;; extend the existing Quincy Ave trail from Federal
Blvd to Centennial Park
Key bicycle recommendations:
• Create a bikeway connection along Lowell Blvd.
that enables residents of the Cities of Sheridan
and Englewood to access City of Sheridan
improvements along Oxford Ave .
• Add a parallel trail to the Mary Carter Greenway
on the east side of the Platte River from Union Ave
to north of Oxford Ave.
Improve bikeway elements along Irving/Union to
connect the western part of Englewood to the
Mary Carter Greenway and the Big Dry Creek Trail.
NE Quadrant
... --i---t-c_oR__,N~LL AV
D-10
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
FLOYD PL
I ~
I~
111r1•11• .. 11m1at1an■•11 ■11 ■-11■11■nan■~~
Propoted 0YerpaM
Mid Block CroNlng
lnttructlon lrnprovament
Prk>dty Padutnan Corridor
Improved Padntrlan Con1dor
-Bikew1y
--Protected Blkewav
: --Blk• 80Ul1Yard
i, --ExlsUng ~I
; ...... Proposed Trail
,. D Clly Of Engltwooa
fl 1.RTSlop
8<1>ool
Park
--=.--:.~-;:-i f NI
D 1,000 2,000
0
F-BAll-,$ ····--··1
• LEWOOD
FOR W A R D
-WALK ii,WHEEL
•.:t•c::H.ij,, /,t,j {.~ H~•i"1f;"I•.•
Key pedestrian recommendations:
Broadway corridor pedestrian Improvements such as way finding
signage and enhanced crosswalks.
• Mid block crossings of Broadway between Hampden and Girard
and between Floyd and Eastman.
• Pedestrian improvements including intersection bulb outs along
Kenyon Ave to improve connections between neighborhoods and
the High School and Middle School.
• Pedestrian scale way finding signage between the City Center
LRT station and the hospital district
• Improved wayfinding signage for the Little Dry Creek Trail
sidewalk conenctions between the Inca/Dartmouth intersection
and the Cherokee/US 285 intersection.
• Pedestrian improvements along Bannock to better connect
neighborhoods with the downtown area and to reinforce
neighborhood connections to Broadway.
Improved pedestrian corridor along Fox and Elati to provide a
low stress experience in the center of the City.
Key bicycle recommendations:
Protected bikeway and bikeway improvement along Dartmouth
Ave to serve bicycle commuters.
• Protected bikeway improvements on Floyd Ave from Inca St to
Sherman St and bikeway improvements from Sherman St to
University Blvd to connect to the protected bikeway loop.
• Bicycle boulevard improvements along Sherman St coupled with
improved pedestrian corridor elements to create a unique and
attractive multi-modal travel corridor in the City.
• Rail trail along the LRT line between Oxford Ave, City Center LRT
station, and Bates Ave to provide a low stress travel
environment between major destinations in Englewood. This
includes overpasses of Oxford Ave, US 285, and Dartmouth Ave.
• •
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
D-11
• ENGLEWOOD
FORWA R D
WALK r, WHEEL
MA.<;TFr( PL.A f"-S fJ{_ POOGP.A~
SE Quad r ant
•
D-12
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Key pedestrian recommendations:
Pedestrian improvements along the Broadway
corridor such as intersection curb bulbouts and
sidewalk amenity improvements.
Pedestrian improvements along Bannock including
an improved crossing of Oxford and improved
connections to Broadway to encourage more walking
trips.
Fox St, Sherman St, Bannock St, Chenango Ave, and
Tufts Ave. improved pedestrian corridors with
enhanced crossings at busy intersections and wider
sidewalks.
Key bicycle recommendations:
Protected Bikeway improvements to Oxford Ave to
serve a wider cross section of users and encourage
more bicycle trips and leverage investments in the
protected bikeway loop. This improvement connects
to planned improvements by the City of Sheridan
west of Santa Fe Dr.
Bikeway improvements on Chenango, Fox, and Tufts
to connect neighborhoods to schools.
Extension of the Sherman St bicycle boulevard from
Oxford Ave south to Belleview Ave.
Extension of the Clarkson St bikeway improvements
from Oxford Ave to Belleview Ave.
Bikeway enhancements to Fox St.
E.LEWOOD
F-OR W A l~D
WALK ~'.WH EEL
M,\. t II 11 • •-.' -,.1·, ,t, .. ~•
Programmatic Recommendations
It is important to implement programmatic elements to complement
physical infrastructure improvements to leverage those investments.
Programmatic elements can be effective at improving the acceptance
of walking and biking as a regular part of daily transportation
activities as well as provide transparency and support for City
decision making processes regarding walking and biking
improvements. The following programmatic elements should be
considered for implementation:
• Establish a sub-committee or special citizen group to be the
voice of walking & biking in Englewood and continue the
dialogue between citizens and policy makers;
• Seek community partners to promote increased walking and
biking within the community;
Increase visibility of walking and biking through events,
programming and educational opportunities;
• Encourage the "interested but concerned" through the addition
of new facilities
• •
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
D-13
• • • ENGLEWOOD
FORWA R D
WALl<O WHEEL
r..t :~sTFJJ P!..AN 0{ P RO G0AM September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Table D-1: Programmatic Recommendations
Bicycle
Rodeos/ Safe
Routes to
Schools (SRTSl
Educational
Activities
Group Walks
or Rides
Walk/Wheel
to Work Day
or Week-
Employer
Involvement
Walk/Wheel
Rewards
Program
By offering bicycle rodeos and other youth educational activities, the City of Englewood can provide children with opportunities to
practice bicycling (or walking) in safe learning environments. These events also give children the safety knowledge they need to continue
riding as they mature.
Bicycle rodeos are set up as bicycle or street skills courses and use cones, signs, and striping to mimic actual on-street traffic scenarios .
Trained instructors use the course to teach children skills including signaling, stopping, yielding, and turning. Rodeos can range from small
and informal gatherings to large-scale events. Rodeos can also be coupled with activities such as helmet-fitting instruction, reward raffles,
and bicycle registration.
Regardless of size, bicycle rodeos require forethought and planning. A course design that addresses a variety of traffic situations must be
considered and required supplies must be assessed. To promote the rodeo and engage more participants, consider hosting it as part of an
existing community and school event.
• Group walks and biG:ycle rides are fun ways to engage community members from a variety of ages and backgrounds. These group activities
can range in focus from a guided walking tour of local gardens or public art to a ride to a local concert series or farmers market, often
highlighting local destinations, community assets, or special features. The focus of each walk or ride should creatively portray walking or
bicycling as a positive and normal mode of transportation.
After the activity, residents may be surprised to learn that they traveled five miles by bike or one mile by foot-organizers should take
advantage of this opportunity to drive home the point that bicycling and walking for everyday trips are possible.
• Employer involvement in a Walk/Wheel to Work day or week encourages employees to try walking or bicycling to work through fun
activities, incentives, and peer-to-peer encouragement. Participants can report their bike and walk commute trips to a team captain or
human resources representative to confirm their participation.
•
Encouragement activities for employees can include free breakfasts or lunches, gift card drawings, group walks or rides, happy hours, or an
early release day.
Organizers and/or employers may consider hosting a bicycle safety overview for employees prior to the event. Messaging to encourage
employees to continue bicycling and walking to work after the event is recommended.
Walk or wheel rewards programs support community health goals by incentivizing shoppers to visit stores by foot or bike with discounts,
free gifts, or rewards points for redemption. Rewards programs also benefit businesses and support economic vitality by opening parking
spaces for other customers and encouraging more foot traffic around store fronts.
Organizers and participating businesses can promote the program through window decals, posters, mailers, or traditional advertising .
• The program may require some type of system for identifying eligible patrons, such as showing one's helmet or a membership card, or It
may be based on the honor system.
• Reasons2Ride is a program/<1pp being developed by a local champion (Joel Phillips) that provides a platform for a rewards program. The
program/app would be activated on a smart phone using QR codes on signs installed on area bikeways. The smartphone would then show
a) where the rider is within the existing bike network, and b) nearby businesses that provide discounts to those riding bicycles. The
Reasons2Ride organization would like to kick the program/app off in Englewood in association with the Walk and Wheel Plan. __ _._.. _______ --------------------------"-----------~~------------
D-14
E. Implementation
Making the Plan recommendation s a reality is an important step In
transforming Englewood and encouraging walking, biking, and
transit trips in the City. This section focuses on two areas of
implementation; Quick Wins and Next Steps.
Quick Win s
A key focus of the Plan development process was to identify early
action opportunities that were realistically achievable by Englewood
in the near term. Analysis, discussions with stakeholders and
citi zens, and conversations with City staff led to the identification of
the following projects as early action opportunities. They are listed
below and shown in a figure on the following page .
• Dartmouth Avenue Shared Bicycle/Parking Lane
• Floyd Avenue Bikeway (Bike Lanes/Sharrows)
• Oxford Avenue Bikeway (Sharrows/Bike Lane/Signage)
• Sherman Street Bike Boulevard (Sharrows/Signage)
Clarkson Street Bikeway (Sharrows/Signage)
• Irving St/Union Ave Bikeway (Sharrows/Signage)
• City Center/Broadway/Medical District Pedestrian Wayfinding
Signage
• Little Dry Creek Trail Enhanced Wayfinding Signage
• • .._
September 2, 201 5 I Final Draft
E-1
_,.
Figure E-1: Quick Wins
. .._'
_,-"\. .. \ ·r
--1 ·-:-·•·cy '
-1::-Y>~_
'·'!.,·;-
•~:U!!, .._,
_, -----·1 -
oh·,M~on•u f-.,..
1
, '•--•
,,
-:~:><, __ :.';=·'""~
•
! i
-:,-..... ..._ .... _._.!-, __ ..... ___ _.}---•
,s· 'l):
' ,--
''
I l
I
I
.1-4-..--,._ ,-, -----...----_~ .-jl-,.,---f"------=---.. ~. I l.R. -1~~-l ";~ .-~~;~ ', }, :, _; __ ..... ,, J' •-.,~ .. i M
• ""'.--'L • -j---I .. ,. Quick Win , ,__ ·.-' -
-_!......--__ . ... ....
; ..
-~·--:--·: ..
lnt■ra.ctlon fmprovam■nt
Prlorlly Ped111 lrla n Corridor
tmprovtd Psclnlrla n Co"lclor
-Blkeway
~---Protoclad Blkoway
J~--~-+-' · < .,, -e1k1BoutHard
.... "'"""" . • •M;_..,,_ ... ____ tl) I ... . ... -ExlaUngTrall
i,.,'__jw--..~-~o ·-• ;_.,.d.~~~~;,: _.L._._~-'-+---~~•---_;:._.__,., ___ , ,--,--'-.,---.:)--~ o ••u PtopoMd Tr11II
.'"''.{'
Gi: J~t~1":~;-:
,. Propoaea ovorp1u
~...., c:J City or Englowood
l:J LRT Stop
School
~ Pafk ,__ ___ ___,~~::~· \. ;' D--,.~,H~-.::c-;;::•t
E-2
0
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Of the Quick Win projects, the following projects
were identified through the planning process and
discussions with City staff as immediate
implementation priorities for Englewood. More
information about each project is presented on
the following pages .
Dartmouth Avenue: Inca to Downing
Oxford Avenue: Broadway to Clarkson
Oxford Avenue: Navajo to Broadway
Clarkson Street: Belleview to Little Dry Creek
Trail
Sherman Street: Oxford to Dartmouth
Floyd Avenue: Elati to University (Conceptual
Design)
Dartmouth Avenue: Inca to Downing
Description I Shared parking/bicycle lane of 10' in width with
vehicular lanes reduced to 11'
Implementation Cost I $85,000
Notel This improvement is expected to help automobiles and
bicyclists share this corridor more effectively by defining the
vehicular operating space. On-street parking levels are low in most
areas of the corridor, which will limit bicycle/parked vehicle conflicts.
Other safety benefits are expected on the hill at Sherman St by
providing positive guidance to drivers. The intersection of
Dartmouth/Broadway requires further study to determine the best
configuration and it may require removal of on street parking for ½
to 1 block on either side of Broadway.
•
E-3
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
=-=O=-:xf=or=d=A=ve=n u=e== =Br==oa=d=-w-=ay_t-=o =Cl=ar::::-ks_o-=-=n ~I;
Description I Shared travel lanes of 14' in width marked with
shared lane markings
Implementation Cost I $26,000
Notes I This improvement will emphasize the multi-modal nature of
this corridor and provide positive guidance to bicyclists as to where
to position themselves in the travel lane to maximize safety of travel.
It will also provide visual information to automobile drivers that they
should expect bicyclists on the road and are required to share the
space with them. This section of Oxford Ave has lower traffic
volumes than there are west of Broadway that lends itself to this
type of improvement.
·•·
• • ENGLEW OO D
FORWA R D
WALK lt,WH EE-L
M4STFn Pl AN 0t PAOGR<1t,,1
Oxford Avenue: Navajo to Broadway
aa .! _. .,,..\ . , raa• I -:-~
S' 7' 6' 11' 10' 11' 6' r 5'
5:6:-.v.:i:tt P1!1tlngWlt> 0.bl.crn, Drivol;nc Cer.:.ert.umi:l'w: lll'l-left B:ll!'br'li? • ~Jilne t S.~
Description I 6' wide striped bicycle lane next to 7' wide parking
lane
Implementat ion Cos t I $50,000
Notes I This section of Oxford has higher traffic volumes and
speeds requiring a higher design treatment than shared lane
markings. There are currently raised medians installed on portions
of this corridor as traffic calm ing devices that would need to be
removed to implement this improvement. This is an important
corridor that connects neighborhoods to the Oxford Ave LRT Station
as well as to the Sherman and Clarkson bicycle facilities.
E-4
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Clarkson St: Belleview to LDC Trai l
,, l5 15·
S!'iTffNi
Description I Shared lane markings in 15' travel lanes
I mplementation Cos t I $50,000
No tes I Clarkson St in this area is the boundary between Cherry
Hills Village and Englewood. The boundary line varies in relation to
the centerline of the street throughout this area resulting in the need
for a joint project between Cherry Hills Village and Englewood.
Traffic volumes and speeds in this section are commensurate with
the installation of shared lane markings. The actual width of the
pavement varies slightly due to the fact that the east side of the
street has no curb or gutter. The current plan is to install painted
shared lane markings here in the immediate terms and to install
more permanent thermoplastic shared lane markings once the
planned pavement overlay project for this roadway is completed in
2016.
r Sherman Street: Oxford to Dartmouth
1 1' 7'
Description I Bike boulevard consisting of shared lane markings in
11' lanes and enhanced wayfinding signage
Implementation Cost I $35,000
Notes I This section of Sherman St connects the improvements
planned for Dartmouth and Oxford on a low volume neighborhood
street that runs the entire length of the City. Although it has a
narrow cross section in this area, the traffic speeds and volumes are
low enough to justify this type of treatment. Bicycle and pedestrian
scale wayfinding signage directing users to connecting routes and
local destinations should be installed in this corridor to enhance its'
status as an important bicycle and pedestrian connector.
• •
E-5
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Next Steps
In addition, important projects that would cost more to implement
and have bigger construction impacts were identified as high
priorities. These projects would be the "Next Steps" projects to
undertake to improve walking and biking in Englewood.
■ Rail trail segment 1 from Big Dry Creek Trail to the Oxford LRT
Station
■ Rail trail segment 2 from City Center LRT Station to Bates Ave
• Protected bikeway on Floyd Ave from Inca St to Sherman St
■ Protected bikeway on Oxford Ave between Navajo St and
Broadway
■ Priority pedestrian corridor improvements along Broadway from
Hampden Ave to Dartmouth Ave
■ Mid-block pedestrian crossing of Broadway at the Gothic Theater
between Floyd Ave and Eastman Ave. A detailed engineering
design for this improvement is already complete.
■ Mid-block pedestrian crossing at the pedestrian paseos between
Hampden Ave and Girard Ave.
F. Maintenance
Considerations
The City of Englewood is considering investing further in the
construction of bicycle and pedestrian facilities such as on-street
bikeways, multi-use pathways and sidewalks, all of which provide
significant, valuable recreational and transportation benefits to local
res idents and visitors. However, ongoing maintenance of these
facilities, and in particular, funding sources to support maintenance
must also be addressed.
This section summarizes existing maintenance activities in a number
of peer cities to Englewood, based on interviews with staff of local
agencies, and identifies challenges to maintaining on-street bike
fac ilities, sidewalks and multi-use paths. It includes a description of
components of successful maintenance programs in comparable
communities.
Importance of Proper Maintenance
Maintaining on -street bike facilities, sidewalks and multi-use paths to
a high standard is important for a variety of reasons.
Safety: Public agencies have a duty to protect the public welfare by
ma intaining facilities to a level that reduces potential safety hazards.
This includes repairing damage on paths and sidewalks that may
pose a tripping hazard, clearing snow in a timely manner, and
preventing ice from forming.
Universal Access: Public agencies are required by federal law to
ma intain public facilities so that they are accessible to people with
disabilities. Small but abrupt vertical changes in level along a path or
sidewalk may not pose a safety hazard to able-bodied pedestrians,
but may present an obstacle to people who are using wheelchairs or
other mobility-assistive devices.
•
F-1
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Attracting Use: Well-maintained facilities, with smooth surfaces,
well-kept vegetation, and up-to-date signage will attract and sustain
use, increasing the livability of the areas served by the network.
Liability: Allowing hazardous conditions to exist along a path or
sidewalk exposes a local agency to potential lawsuits.
Protecting the Public Investment: Regular preventative
maintenance on an on-street bike facility, path or sidewalk (e.g.
periodic overlays on multi-use paths) can extend the lifetime of the
existing facility and delay the need for more expensive repairs.
Primary Maintenance Functions
Primary functions of maintaining on-street bike facilities, sidewalks
and multi-use paths include:
Maintaining pavement quality through spot repairs, regular
overlays and longer-term repaving
• Maintaining trails and sidewalks to ADA standards
• Sweeping and removal of garbage and debris on a regular basis
• Vegetation trimming to provide clear access on a monthly basis
• Snow removal after storms
• Restriping paths as needed, usually annually
• Landscaping maintenance on a weekly or monthly basis,
including irrigation costs
• Lighting feature maintenance, including electricity costs
• Repair of damage due to storms, floods, collisions and other
unforeseen events
Repair and replacement of wayfinding or other signage
•
Resea D"d'!l Metlhodoiogy
The project team used the following strategies to research this topic
and identify regional successes and struggles for reference .
• Interviews with Englewood staff
• Interviews with peer city staff
• National research on maintenance issues
Staff from Englewood and other peer communities were contacted
and asked to share information about maintenance activities in their
agency. Staff contacts are listed in Table F-1.
Table F-1: Agency Staff Contacted Regarding Bicycle and
Pedestrian Facility Maintenance
Charlie Blosten City of Littleton Spoke on 1/29/2015
Dave Bakett/ City of Lakewood Email on 2/3/201S John Padon ·-----•:...·----
Dave Lee City of Englewood Spoke on 2/11/2015
--------.. .. ------.. -~ .¥-#---·-,.,.,_,,_,..., .. ..,., ._ ... --... ~---·
Previous
Research ' City of Madison, WI ~ Previous Research
Contacts
Dan Raine/ City and County of Spoke in August 2015 Emily Snyder Denver ---~-
F-2
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
!Reseaurclhl furndongs
Maintenance policies and procedures varied among the communities
contacted. Of the agencies contacted, none had specific
money/funding budgeted for bicycle and pedestrian facility
maintenance, and none regularly require additional maintenance
funding to be provided or allocated when a new bike facility was
built. Most agencies stated that bicycle and pedestrian facility
maintenance was completed not by one department in particular,
but was a cross-department collaboration, often without pre-defined
assignments or agreements. Table F-2 shows a summary of agency
responses to questions relating to bicycle and pedestrian facility
maintenance.
Table F-2: Maintenance Policy and Funding Summary by
Agency Interviewed
["Cl'-.tlnt:
Add rundlm; to
Alloc:it!on M.11ntf'n ,,ncr
r~1 ,11 nt1'r,1nc~ 811dRr>t fund i ng Sourer,;; M.1 ,ntr>.,,1 ncP
fer O l-t"'/P ~d 'rnr-1 for Ourl,;'°I w 11rn new U<ed Staff
c ,,pl t,,I Oud g el?
Oik.,/P,•d? l1 k,, f,H',f'tl,..s MP
Clty
bul,t7
GenP.ral fund and Ground>
Uttleton No No No then open space maintenance, fund (20% of open
spacr. fund)
street,
Operational PW and budget and Lak•wood No Nn Nn Community GPnPral fund for Resources street rnsurfaclnR
Overall Open Space
maintenance bud~cl Arap ohor Co Ori,n Spac~.
En1Jewood that 1, $2,137,252 No No Puhhc \Vnrks,
for all 0P<"o ~""'·"
Shareback funds a,nd SSPR
fadlltlc~
Cro"ist's
departm~nts
(parks and
Among others, City
s,dewalks engineering).
Madl,on No No NP PropPrty Ownrr AddNI 1 FTE ..
1/2 v,ar Assessment striping and
1/2 year bus
stnp ~now
removal
Note: All information provid~d for littleto11, Lakewood, and Enall!'wood is for FY 1015
• • ..,
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Existing Current Cnpttal Budr,ct C1t,1Pn r-Antntr-nal'ltP Mair:~rnllflCf.' Prior tirallon Renortlng?
t•./';ilnt•)nn1cr.
Oudeet 2015 C~pital Include Oikc/ Ped
Pror,ram~ Gudget tn,provemt:-ntsi'
A< needed. ~undlng I< added Sometimes, but
incrementally thfoguhout the years. Pothole Adopt a Trail, $1,950,000 $8.2 million not this year
Some scheduled (Rralliti), but many as reporting app Adopt a Street ( resurfacing) becnusc of rcc1mt
needed. completion<
As nerded. Fu nding "Just absorbed $300,000 (plu< Ve\and IS $11,n7,230 (PW highest risk arns addres<ed first. Adopt a Str~P.t $22 million one,,tim~
Unwritten • swtiep trails onc:e a month. hlghly uso~ only)
$2,000,000)
Gtn,.rir form $120,000 annually Nl)nu otny,no,~ •
on the wPb\1tc from Arapah0t• Co yP.ars ar.o thaw
Safety first , !hen a, needed; for t.1t11.~m, to ~lll•Stax in
wa, for n1,t>n c;par..P
a~k <lllP\ttntl\. NMP im,jects. Vfl'1-tf!'tat1on and trai;h, schedulP.d Or phone call combination with (S600.CXIO i\nnuallv
or c1,1all tu the overall Open from Ar;,pahn,r
department Space budget Cou nty)
Prloritl1Po; h1 g hPr•11~P trains. DocumPnti;
for maintenance practic.es: tamon ~
others) City owned sidewalks and $500,000 for
school/handicap cro.swalk1 are Website blkcwav,; program
maintained during rl!gular business reporting (capital budget);
hours during a storm . Main bike rout~ includes som~
are maintained starting at 4AM on resurfaclnR, etc
weekdays In order to be traversable en
mormng commute.
F-3
• • ENGLEWOOD
FORW AR D
WALK f!WHEEL
Mtc;T;.U PLAf'.i (.)t j'::ROGRM""
Obstacles to Proper Maintenance
There are three main obstacles to successful bicycle and pedestrian
facility maintenance programs, according to the peer city interviews
completed for this and other projects:
1. The first, and most common issue in the cities examined, is a
lack of dedicated funding. There are fewer grants available for
maintenance activities than are available for construction of new
facilities.
2. Second, proper equipment, trained, or allocated personnel may
not be available. For example, shared-use trails require narrow
snow -blowers for snow removal, but these machines may not be
owned by the jurisdiction.
3. Third, there may be too little or too much coordination between
different departments regarding whose responsibility it is to
maintain bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and the exact duties
that are required of the responsible party.
4. Most Cities "Make it Work"
Each of the communities that were surveyed (and many other
communities that have been contacted through other studies) take
an enthusiastic "make it work" approach to maintenance of bicycle
and pedestrian facilities because the benefits of improved livability
and desirability outweigh the additional money/time these facilities
may require. It is worth noting that both Lakewood and Littleton
have significantly higher lane miles of on-street and off-street bicycle
facilities than Englewood, and they have continued to maintain them
as necessary through alternate, combined, and shared funding and
responsible agencies.
F-4
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Case Studies -W lhl y Otlher Co m m unuties are
Success fanB
Additional information was gathered from case study cities (cities
with readily available maintenance information) with successful
maintenance programs or policies to aid in comparing with
Englewood's current policies and concerns . These case study cities
(as well as peer cities) build and maintain bicycling and walking
facilities because they are a priority f or the community. As a
result, they are privy to the economic benefits and quality of life
benefits these types of facilities bestow on the community . A few
examples of information provided by these cities to describe
approach to maintenance or reasoning for providing bicycle and
pedestrian facilities with continuing maintenance are listed below:
0 Madison -"We treat bicycling infrastructure no different from
other infrastructure we have. We don't ask that [about
maintenance cost concerns] about other development. We don't
stop building housing because of the cost of trash pick-up and
sewers."
• A study of Maryland's Northern Central Rail Trail found that the
state received $303,000 per year in trail related tax income while
paying $192,000 per year in maintenance.
• Dayton and Miami Valley -the trail system, which cost
approximately $50 million over 30 years, has an annual positive
economic impact of nearly $15 million.
E.LE WO OD
FORWARD
WALK '(.WH E EL
"'-1:,: .. "I' 1·1 ••H •...,·• 1-rr,· ,,J ,• .• •
G. Potential Economic
Benefits
There are two categories of potential economic benefits related to
improving pedestrian and bicycle facilities in Englewood. The first
category, labeled Qualitative Benefits, is related to improving the
attractiveness of Englewood to new residents and supporting current
residents desires to stay in the community. These benefits are hard
to quantify and consist of quality of life improvements, property
value increases, sales ta x receipt impacts, and other more intangible
benefits. The second are more quantifiable and measurable benefits
related to lower transportation costs, improved community health
and improved environmental characteristics .
Figure G-1 illustrates qualitative benefits of improving bicycle and
pedestrian systems .
•
G-1
•
September 2, 201 5 I Final Draft
Figure G-1:Economic Benefits of Bi keways
O:CYCLISTS SPEND
MORE
r:11\tO~t•I;\, ....,,'f) Ofr ~ \Jy
(ll.1t<'moh1k-:mn "'d t.,_c ..-iris,
001 V Jt J,n_f(TJI\ ;,1 \ of t•1e
c st11u',dl<"YtC'lh. but c"cl s!s
SI-.Olld the most. r,cr n:Qf't•1
.......... ~ ................. -. ...... , ..... , ... •t~ ........ ........ ..... ,.,, , ............ -.. ,
Thr entire bikeway netwon<
i ... c ,~lo",f.'1"r1 l1;~f 1r"t.'
,it frtd u,m·A Mc,-101• ''rel
.wl' l:1.-, .. fl ,-M'IC'~~ n(
of Portla'ld, Ow.qon wa~ built for less 1han tl-w ms·
of mnstructlnq one mile of freeway. 11 %
'f.(\ ...
1"j-(":':
, ........ ~ ... •.-•-.. .............. -....... ,, ...
>t ,....,.1,,, • .,~•oll ·-.\..1w,, ••• ·)•
., .\;;,· ............. :· .. ~-...
BIKEWAYS ARE VALUABLE NElGH80f1HOOO ASSETS
-----·---
OIKEWAYS
/\~TRAC'" PEOPLE
~~w~tw 1
8 % 1:f •'1~~tilt•1~h .. l!'.lr ~/:,~h :-1stt•n. JC·:1
1'it~ St,-.~t t1t<1':t~t•nl hlito '.!flt' ~ov It.'~
il v11 ·u.:tt11e ll'Sl'lr.\ to tho 'le~ffhorho-'.Jrl.
• I •H.., ........... \00•.•"r•~~""••I •-•-.. "
....... -~-.......... ,,.~·· •• ,., ..... J "'
or tll"IN tfAll~µ11l~1 ,, Ptrdan tJ. aa
wo-..J b1M1 4U d tho citf•
blb-frlandlynau -a lacta, In
!heir docltfan to-.
• • E NGL E W OOD
FORWA R D
WALK f,-w -HE{L-
MJ\S}'FI• Pl/ll'i {){;.•r.toG P/•/..,.t
Additionally there are qualitative benefits for health and safety
shown in Figure G-2.
Figure G-2 : Health a nd Safety Benefits of Bikeways
-.
· Health & Safety Benefits 0vb • & .
:, ofBlkeways
1"'
IWTO-O~Nfeo 1.i1'Ni'.f!J~ Wl'fH
STffi:E ffl IIJKfi UNES
STREETS WITH BIKEWAVS
ARE SAfE STREETS
!.!k:'/t ngonanp,,:.r•J~r.dt,~dtt1i:,s «!
11rh.itiocd bilu1w.:iy, •.$ .a.o~or tiw1 r5i1 111.3 ¢'I
:itr,r.,ctj w«na»t btt:yc.o f,u. ti ·, ......... ,_.,.,,,.....,...,.,.,, .. ,__. ... ,,. --~•-···· ..... -----... -· .. ·•· .. ·,,·-"•··
MORE SEPARATI ON i ··•
ALSO PROTECTS • · w
PEDESTRIANS
-I"·•-............ -, ... .,. ._,..,.,,.,.,,.,,~ ... -··-
•,H;)IHi1'3W 1nt
U!Kfi LANF.S
BIKEWAV STREETS BRING
BICYCLISTS
ihcyc,·i<. i:ro J.S tinle!l f'Nl"(• I ,t.<J'., to r1,u-o,.
r..,_hn-ttf'!J b#!NIU'/$ l",11"tV1 tl1n strod
3 7% REDUCTION in
SIDEWALK RIDING
1-~~;r;cd t.~"1111\:t: ,. ioc: l" J!t\l' ••
~.r>U lor pcdt.~•1Mrs.
5 6 % REDUCTION in
INJURIES
'O tff ~•K,rt .,tr•~ ,tl11• N"I! I'-
1w:ltH,n>d l11i« kir-1..oo; 1 .. ~--v(Jr-. oi-.
s2so ~CAA<
Pr),i,c,:Q y ni..t"~ '1,.,..IJ:.J'f(.t.') fll..l.<t'10
.tW,UII ,r;iW,-$4~ .ii:.'" h:.i►.h (,!Q•(!
t..CSb µll r,-c,1rcc1rpllft.-dt<J x,.,ao.,Wr,
,,..~~;,
AUOEDl!ittARATION
FROM FA.CT•MOYtNG
TIWl'IC
SAFETY IN NUMBERS
l r o . kc ,..eoolhc.ta ;tW'" ocnor:w,'!'c~or
o c',Ou•8 w · oo ,v-,.d 1:y .. mowr-ndo::"C".11cs .a, lt•a-numt>c~or cticp~b-t.yc.l -ig.:i•·a Wcl'V!g
....... ·~ ........ ·--·#·····~~ .,-.,-,~;---... ,-.)', .. -.,...
G-2
•
September 2, 201 5 I Fin a l Draft
Qua li"il t fi fied Befl'lleflt Ca~cuUation
This section contains an analysis of the quantified benefits that
might occur as the result of implementing the recommended projects
in the Englewood Walk and Wheel Master Plan. The analysis
estimates the number of bicycle and pedestrian trips that would
directly result from the implementation of the project list,
approx imates the corresponding reduction in vehicle trips and
vehicle miles travelled (VMT), and assesses the potential health-,
environmental-, and transportation-related benefits .
The impact analysis utilizes a standard methodology for calculating
health-, environmental-, and transportation -related benefits. All
projections are based on five-year estimates from the U.S . Census
Bureau, which are then extrapolated through the use of various
multipliers derived from national studies and quantified in terms of
monetary value where appropriate . The estimated monetary values
are then calibrated to baseline values and compared to bicycling and
pedestrian mode splits of peer cities that recently have implemented
similar projects .
Selecting Peer Cities
The consultant team examined levels of bicycling and walking in
municipalities with similar infrastructure already in place, called peer
cities. Selection factors in choosing these municipalities included the
existing street network, geographic location, climate, topography,
socio-demographic data, and the completeness of the city's bicycle
and pedestrian network.
E.LEWOOD
FORWARD • •
WALK '',WHEEL M/\-lru ,r 1,,:-.,t..." ,,r ,:-,11 ·.•,• September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Table G-1: General Characteristics Comparison of Selected
Peer Cities
I Englewood I Littleton, co I Oak Park, IL I Claremont, CA I Jackson, WV I Park City, UT I Helena, MT l?Bo rem_an,-MT
Street Network' Tight Grid Loose Grid Large Grid Large Grid Large Grid Linear Tight Grid Tight Grid
Region Mountain West MountalA West Midwest West Mountain West Mountain West Mountain West Mountain West:
Climate
, Elevation (ft)
Population 1
; Population
Density per
Square Mlle 1
Percent
Minority
Population 1
, Bicycle Friendly
Community
Award Level 1
Walk Friendly
Community
Award Level1
Semi-Arid
5,371
30,840
4,844
28.2%
None
None
Semi-arid Humid
Continental
5,351 594
41,737 51,878
I
2,902 11,038
8.2% 32.3%
~·
None Bronze
None None
Mediterranean Continental Semi-arid Semi-arid Continental
1,168 6,237 7,000 3,875 4,820
34,926 9,577 7,873 28,190 37,280
2,600 3,291 4,430 1,724 1,950
29.4% 20.2% 19.0% 6.7% 6.4%
.. i Silver Gold Silver Bronze Silver
It
None None None None None
Bozeman, Claremont, Helena, Jackson, Littleton, Oak Park, and Park City were chosen by the consultant team as peer cities because they have
similar design, geographic, and demographic characteristics to Englewood, and because each city except for Littleton has achieved a Bronze
Level League of American Bicyclist's Bicycle Friendly Community® award designation or higher. After the identification of peer cities based on
general characteristics, the consultant team analyzed the bicycle and pedestrian commute data from each city. Compared to selected peer
cities, Englewood has the second lowest bicycle commute mode share (1.55%) and third lowest pedestrian commute mode share (2.75%)
according to five-year American Community Survey data from 2009 to 2013.
G-3
!
• ENGLEWOOD
FORWARD
M:C,~r\~~ -~~o~;A~1 L
Table G-2: Estimated Future Walk and bike Mode Split
• •
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
~: . --,---En le~ood --,· Littleton, I Oak Park, Clarem~nt, · 1 Ja~kson, I Park City, I Helena, I Bozeman,
, g CO IL CA WY UT MT MT
Employed Population ' 16,606 21,011
Dally Bicycle Commute Trips 257 131
Bicycle Commute Mode Share ' 1.55% 0.62%
Scenario 1 Future Blcycle Commute
Mode Share• 1.76%
Scenario 2 Future Bicycle Commute
Mode Share •• 2.75 %
Scenario 3 Future Bicycle Commute
Mode Share•" 4.24%
Daily Walk Commute Trips ' 456 497
Walk Commu te Mode Share' I; 2.75 % 23796
Scenario 1 Future Walk Commute Mode
Share* 2.99%
Scenario 2 Future Walk Commute Mode
Share"" 7.85%
Scenario 3 Future Walk Commute Mode
Share••·• 9.76%
*Based on the difference between Englewood's exi sting bicycle and walk commute mode
share and the 25th percentile bicycle and walk mode share of peer cities .
**Based on the difference between Englewood's existing bicyde and walk commute mode
share and the 50th percentile bicycle and walk mode share of peer cities .
***Based on the difference between Englewood 's existing bicycle and walk commute mode
share and the 90th percentile bicycle and walk mode share of peer cities .
26,792 14,493 6,224 4,262 15 ,122 21 ,050
445 270 171 119 482 1,22 7
1.66% 1.86% 2.75 % 3.19% 5.83 %
967 1,392 608 1,187 2,055
3.61 % 9.60 % 9.77 %
---.....-r----n -------, l 1.as% 9.76%
~
G-4
• LEWOOD
FOR W ARD
WALK '.' WHEEL
~~·-. .. n 1, 1·. :,t 1 ( .. i r,r .., ,P .·.•
Multipliers
Multipliers were developed through an analysis of the relationship
between two or more model inputs (such as the number of vehicle-
miles reduced) and associated model outputs (such as the cost of
road maintenance per every vehicle-mile travelled). The model used
for this study utilizes over 50 multipliers in order to extrapolate daily,
monthly, and annual trip rates, trip distance, vehicle trips replaced,
emission rates, physical activity rates, and other externalities linked
to an increase in bicycling and walking trips and to a decrease in
motor vehicle trips. Individual multipliers of note are covered in more
detail in the sections that follow.
Limitations
The primary purpose of the analysis is to enable a more informed
policy discussion on whether and how best to invest in a bicycle and
pedestrian network in Englewood. Even with extensive primary and
secondary research incorporated into the impact analysis model, it is
impossible to accurately predict the exact impacts of various factors.
Accordingly, all estimated benefit values are rounded and should be
considered order of magnitude estimates, rather than exact
amounts.
Health Benefits
The implementation of a well-designed, connected bicycle and
pedestrian network across Englewood will encourage a shift from
energy -intensive modes of transportation such as cars and trucks to
active modes of transportation such as bicycling and walking. The
impact analysis model evaluates and quantifies the estimated
increase in bicycling and walking trips, the estimated increase in
hours of physical activity, and the annual savings resulting from
reduced healthcare costs. In order to evaluate these health factors,
the consultant team analyzed readily-available data inputs.
•
G-5
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Health Calculations
The primary inputs into the health component of the impact analysis
model come from five-year estimates of commute trip data from the
U.S. Census Bureau. Five-year estimates were chosen because they
are the most reliable dataset available from the U.S. Census Bureau
between the 10-year censuses and because they allow for analysis at
the individual census tract level.
After extrapolating the commute trip data to recreational trips and to
estimate daily, monthly, and annual trip values, the consultant team
used a series of multipliers and assumptions to calculate the various
health factors. Englewood currently experiences 977,000 bicycle trips
and 1,593,000 walk trips per year. If the City implements the
recommended projects under Scenario 1, Englewood could
experience 135,000 additional bicycling trips and 204,000 additional
walking trips per year. If the recommended projects under Scenario
2 are implemented, the City could experience 757,000 additional
bicycling trips and 4,311,000 additional walking trips per year. If the
City implements the recommended projects under Scenario 3,
Englewood could experience 1,702,000 additional bicycling trips and
5,929,000 additional walking trips per year. Using trip distance
multipliers derived the National Household Travel Survey (NHTS) and
annual vehicle trip replacement factors derived from a combination
of US Census data, NHTS data, and historic Safe Routes to School
data, the estimated increase in distance bicycled is 187,000,
1,048,000, and 2,357,000 miles per year for Scenario 1, 2, and 3,
respectively. The estimated increase in distance walked is 61,000,
1,293,000, and 1,779,000 miles per year for the Scenario 1, 2, and
3, respectively. The combined bicycle and walk trips for Scenario 3
would result in 3,441,000 fewer vehicle-miles travelled (VMT)
annually.
These annual distance estimates and VMT reduction estimates were
used to calculate changes in physical activity rates among residents
in Englewood. Implementation of the recommended projects for
•
Scenario 1 could result in 39,000 more hours of physical activity per
year among Englewood residents, and 536,000 and 829,000 for
Scenarios 2 and 3, respectively. This increase in physical activity
means that no more residents will be meeting the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) minimum number of hours of
physical activity per day under Scenario 1, 4,000 under Scenario 2,
and 6,000 under Scenario 3. This is equal to a jump from
approximately 18.83 percent of the regional physical activity need
being met at current baseline levels to 36.59 percent of the regional
physical activity need being met under Scenario 3 -an increase of
17.76 percent. This growth in the percent of people within the City
exercising also equates to a $238,000 reduction in healthcare
expenses per year under Scenario 3.
Table G-3: Annual Health Benefits
Annual Bicycle Trips 977,000 1,112,000 1,734,000 2,679,000
I J, lr Annual Miles Bicycled 1 2,240,000 . 2,427,000 3,288,000 4,597,000
Annual Walk Trips 2,319,000 2,523,000 6,630,000 8,248,000
Annual Miles Walked :, 1,593,000 1,654,000 Ji 2,886,000 i' 3,372,000
Annual Hours of 755,000 794,000 1,291,000 1,467,000 Physical Activity
Number of Resident
Meeting CDC
Recommended 6,000 6,000 10,000 12,000
Number of Hours of
Physical Activity
Physical Activity Need 18.83% 19.80% 32 .20% 39.51 % Met
Annual Healthcare Cost
I $105,QQQ $115,000 $262,000 $343,000 Savings
~ G-6
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
!E llilvirollilmernta~ !Seflileiflits
While the causes of physical inactivity and pollution stem from many
sources, the implementation of the recommended bicycle and
pedestrian projects in Englewood will contribute to a shift from
energy-intensive modes of transportation such as cars and trucks to
active modes of transportation such as bicycling and walking. The
impact analysis model evaluates and quantifies the estimated
increase in bicycling and walking trips and the annual savings from
reduced vehicle emissions. In order to evaluate these environmental
factors, a number of readily-available data inputs were analyzed.
Environmental Calculations
The primary inputs into the environmental component of the impact
analysis model come from five-year estimates of commute trip data
from the U.S. Census Bureau. Using the same estimates of VMT
reduction calculated in the health benefits analysis, changes in
hydrocarbon, particulate matter, nitrous oxides, carbon monoxide,
and carbon dioxide were analyzed. In total, the replacement of
motor vehicle trips with active transportation trips may result in an
estimated 302,000, 3,509,000, and 5,726,000 fewer pounds of CO2
emissions per year under Scenario 1, 2, and 3, respectively, and
7,000, 67,000, and 111,000 fewer pounds of other vehicle emissions
under Scenario 1, 2, and 3, respectively . Based on a review of air
emissions studies, each pound of emissions were assigned an
equivalent dollar amount based on how much It would cost to clean
up the pollutant or the cost equivalent of how much damage the
pollutant causes the environment. The total reduction in vehicle
emissions is equal to a savings of $115,000 in related environmental
damage or clean-up per year under Scenario 3. Other potential
ecological services associated with the bicycle projects such as water
regulation, carbon sequestration, carbon storage, and waste
treatment exist, but the quantifiable value of these services are
negligible on the overall impact of the recommended project list.
E.LEWOOD
~-OR WA f~D
WALK \; W H EEL
,., \, 11 If , , ',I,. ~ I ,~ ,. • •'
Table G-4: Annual Environmental Benefits
• •
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Englewood I Baseline I Scenario 1 I Scenario 2 ·rs.cf~_a.i:£q 3W:lfr21~
Reduction in CO2 Emissions (lbs) 2,664,000 2,966,000
Reduction In CO2 Emissions (lbs) (beyond
baseline scenario)
Reduction In Other Vehicles Emissions (lbs) 53,000 60,000
Reduction In Other Vehicles Emissions (lbs)
{beyond baseline scenario)
Total Vehicle Emission Cost Savings $55 000 , $61,000
j Total Vehlcle Emission Cost Savings
(beyond baseline scenario)
Transportation Benefits
The most readily identifiable benefits of the recommended project
list derive from their use as a connection between activity centers
and residences. While no money may change hands, real savings
can be estimated from the reduction costs associated with
congestion, vehicle crashes, road maintenance, and household
vehicle operations.
Transportation Calculations
The primary inputs into the health component of the impact analysis
model come from five -year estimates of commute trip data from the
U.S. Census Bureau.
G-7
6,173,000 8,390,000
302,000 3,509,000 1 5,726,000
1
120,000 164,000
7,000 67,000 ! 111,000
I
$123,000 $170,000
$6,000 $68,000 $115,000 -
Utilizing the same calculations for estimated increase in annual
bicycle and walk trips and annual VMT reductions used in the health
and environmental components, transportation-related cost savings
can be calculated. By multiplying the amount of VMT reduced by
established multipliers for traffic congestion, vehicle collisions, road
maintenance, and vehicle operating costs, monetary values can be
assigned to the transportation-related benefits. In total, an annual
cost savings of $245,000, $2,648,000, and $4,438,000 is estimated
for the City under Scenario 1, 2, and 3, respectively.
•
.. • • ENGLEWOOD
FORWA R D
~A.~RAc~~&~o~~IL .
Table G-5: Annual Transportation Benefits
Traffic Congestion $115,000 $128,000 $259,000 Cost Savings
· Vehicle Collision $819,000 $914,000 $1,845,000 Cost Savings
Road Maintenance $245,000 $274,000 $554,000 Cost Savings
, Household Vehicle $934,000 $1,042,000 I $2,103,000 Cost Savings
'
Total Vehicle Costs $2,113,000 $2,358,000 $4,761,000
Savings
Additional Cost
I Savings $0 $245,000 $2,648,000
(beyond baseline
scenario) H
$356,000
$2,540,000
$761,000
$2,894,000
$6,551,000
$4,438,000
If all of the projects under Scenario 1 for the Englewood Walk and
Wheel Master Plan are implemented, the City could experience a
total of $261,000 in additional health-, environmental-, and
transportation-related benefits per year. Scenario 2 could experience
$2,873,000 in annual benefits, and Scenario 3 could experience
$4,791,000 in annual benefits.
G-8
•
September 2, 2015 I Final Draft
Table G-6: Total Annual Benefits
· · I · . Scenariofi,1 Scenari~ I Scenario Baseline · ½'lep:,,·-·,r.:._,,,. 2 3
~-,.·-
Annual Health $105,000 $115,000 $262,000 $343,000 Benefits
Annual
Environmental $55,000 $61,000 $123,000 $17 0,000
Benefits --
Annual
Transportation $2,113,000 $2,358,000 $4,761,000 $6,551,000
Benefits
Total Annual $2,273,000 $2,534,000 $5,146,000 $7,064,000 Benefits
Total Additional
Annual Benefits $0 $2 61,000 $2,8 73,000 $4,791,000 (beyond baseline
scenario)
1 American Community Survey. (2009-2013).
Ii ]bid.
li 1 /bid.
iv lbicl.
v "Current Bicycle Friendly Communities." (2014). The League of
American Bicyclists.
http:/ /bikeleague.org/ sites/ default/files/ BFC _MasterList_2014.pdf
v1 "Full List of Walk Friendly Communities." (2014). Walk Friendly
Communities. http://www.walkfriendly.org/communities/list.cfm
vii American Community Survey. (2009-2013).
Vi ii Ibid.
IX Ibid.
•Ibid.
XI Ibid.
xii "When to use 1-year, 3-year, or 5-year estimates." US Census Bureau.
http: I lwww census gov /acs /www Ll.lmdance for data users /estimates
L
•
•
•
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
Date: Agenda Item: Subject: A Resolution Approving
October 19 , 2015 11ci FY2016 Community Development
Block Grant Application
Initiated By: Staff Source:
Community Development Department Harold J . Stitt , Senior Planner
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION
City Council has approved resolutions to file Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
applications annually since 1977. Participation in the Arapahoe County entitlement program
began in 1991. Participation is authorized in three-year increments . Ordinance 19, Series of
2015, approved an Intergovernmental Agreement to participate in the Arapahoe County
Community Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnership Programs for federal
fiscal years 2016 through 2018.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Staff recommends that Council approve a resolution authorizing staff to apply to Arapahoe
County for the City of Englewood 's portion of federal fiscal year 2016 Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) funds.
BACKGROUND, ANALYSIS, AND ALTERNATIVES IDENTIFIED
The U. S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) CDBG Entitlement Program
provides grants to units of local government and urban counties to meet housing and
community development needs . The objective of the program is to enhance urban communities
by providing:
• decent, safe , affordable housing;
• improved infrastructure;
• public facilities and services;
• economic opportunities.
The Federal Program objectives are achieved through projects developed by local governments
that primarily benefit low and moderate-income families as well as other federal objectives . The
request for funds may also include activities that meet urgent development needs in
communities such as damage from flooding, tornadoes , fire, etc . Local governments determine
which activities best serve the objectives of the program .
Funds are appropriated annually by the Congress for the CDBG program and are allocated by
statutory formula to each entitlement area . Arapahoe County is approved as an urban county
entitlement area. The CDBG grant funds are currently distributed to participating cities within
Arapahoe County. Each participating city receives a set-aside portion of the total CDBG
allocation . The current participating cities are the Cities of Englewood , Littleton , Sheridan,
Glendale, Deer Trail, Centennial, and Greenwood Village. The funding level for the City of
Englewood for FY2016 is anticipated to be $150,000, the same as it was for 2015.
Applications for each proposed project must be submitted to Arapahoe County no late r than
November 6, 2015 in order to receive 2016 CDBG funding. The applications for the City of
Englewood will be for a total of $150,000 .00. Englewood 's FY2016 program consists of two
projects. These projects continue to meet current housing and neighborhood needs benefitting
low and moderate-income families . All projects are subject to additional review by City staff,
Arapahoe County CDBG administrators and the County Commissioners. The listed projects
and funding levels may change based on those reviews . FY2016 CDBG funds will be
requested for the following projects:
1) $127,500 for an energy efficiency home improvements project focusing on
improvements that provide increased energy conservation and efficiency in the
home ;
2) $22 ,500 for a fifteenth year request to transfer a portion of the City's CDBG
allocation to directly fund the Family Tree application that assists with staffing needs
for the House of Hope homeless shelter. Family Tree will submit an application
directly to Arapahoe County for the grant. A letter of sponsorship is only required
from the City to support Family Tree's application to Arapahoe County.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Existing Community Development staff will administer the proposed projects . Staff salaries and
~--6erlefifsrepreSenflfl0 Ciiy ,-s-pa·rtrcip8liOrf rn tneprOJects . -----~ ~---·------------
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Resolution
•
•
•