Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-168Master Plan October 2007 � VAIL TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN UPDATE � � Pre ared or: P f Town of Vail Public Works Department 1309 Elkhorn Drive Vail, Colorado 81657 Prepared by: Felsburg Holt & Ullevig 6300 South Syracuse Way, Suite 600 Centennial, CO 80111 303/721-1440 Project Manager: Christopher J. Fasching, PE FHU Reference No. 05-168 October 2007 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update TABLE OF CONTENTS Paqe EXECUTIVE SUMMARY -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- i I. I NTRODU CTION-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 I I. EXISTI N G CON DITI ON S --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4 A. Traffic Conditions---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4 B. Parking----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------14 C. Transit-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------15 III. ANTICIPATED GROWTH -------------------------------------------------------------------------------18 A. Development --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------18 B. Parking----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------19 C. Inter-Relationship of the Various Modes ---------------------------------------------------21 IV. PROJECTED 2025 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC CONDITIONS-------------------------------22 A. Traffic Volume Forecasts-----------------------------------------------------------------------22 B. Traffic Operations --------------------------------------------------------------------------------24 V. IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVES--------------------------------------------------------------------28 A. Mai n Va i I I nterchange---------------------------------------------------------------------------28 B. West Vail Interchange---------------------------------------------------------------------------32 C. South Frontage Road —Vail Road to Ford Park------------------------------------------35 D. South Frontage Road —Vail Road to West Lionshead (Ever Vail) ------------------38 E. West Vail Redevelopment----------------------------------------------------------------------39 F. Other I m provements-----------------------------------------------------------------------------39 G. Transit-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------40 H. Parking----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------41 VI. FRONTAGE ROAD ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN ------------------------------------------44 VII. RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION PLAN----------------------------------------------------45 A. Roadway Improvements------------------------------------------------------------------------45 B. Travel Demand Management-----------------------------------------------------------------49 C. Transit-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------52 D. Parking----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------55 E. Pedestrians and Trails --------------------------------------------------------------------------55 VI I I. I M PROVE M E NT TRI P TH RES H O LDS --------------------------------------------------------------56 IX. IMPROVEMENT COST ESTIMATES ----------------------------------------------------------------59 X. OTH E R CO NS I D E RATION S ---------------------------------------------------------------------------62 A. Priorities --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------62 B. Other Planning Efforts---------------------------------------------------------------------------62 C. I-70 PEIS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------63 � F�re�sr�,r.c C� Hi)LT & ULLE'L'IC� Vail Transportation Master Plan Update LIST OF FIGURES Paae Figure ES-1 Recommended Frontage Road Improvement Plan — Main Vail-----------------------iv Figure ES-2 Recommended Frontage Road Improvement Plan —West Vail------------------------v Figure 1. Town of Vail Study Area------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Figure 2. Existing Peak Season Traffic------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 Figure 3. Existing Levels of Service----------------------------------------------------------------------- 8 Figure 4. Existing Vail Bus System-----------------------------------------------------------------------17 F ig u re 5. Tri p Assig n ment Distri bution-------------------------------------------------------------------23 Figure 6. Year 2025 Peak Hour Traffic Projections --------------------------------------------------25 Figure 7. Year 2025 Peak Hour Levels of Service----------------------------------------------------26 Figure 8. Recommended Frontage Road Improvement Plan — Main Vail----------------------46 Figure 9. Recommended Frontage Road Improvement Plan —West Vail----------------------47 Figure 10. Year 2025 Peak Hour Traffic Projection with Recommended Plan------------------50 Figure 11. Year 2025 Peak Hour Levels of Service with Recommended Plan -----------------51 Figure 12. Proposed Vail Bus Routes---------------------------------------------------------------------53 Figure 13. West Vail Frontage Road Improvements---------------------------------------------------60 F ig u re 14. Mai n Va i I F rontage Road I m prove ments---------------------------------------------------61 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. 2005-2006 Season Travel Time Summary ------------------------------------------------10 Table 2. Vail Frontage Road Accident Summary— Six Years------------------------------------12 Table 3. Trip Generation Rates---------------------------------------------------------------------------24 Table 4. Travel Time Comparison -----------------------------------------------------------------------27 Table 5. Main Vail Interchange North Roundabout—Alternatives Assessment -------------29 Table 6. Main Vail Interchange South Roundabout—Alternatives Assessment-------------30 Table 7. West Vail Interchange North Roundabout—Alternatives Assessment-------------33 Table 8. West Vail Interchange South Roundabout—Alternatives Assessment-------------34 Table 9. South Frontage Road Alternatives Analysis— East of Main Vail Interchange — 2025 Traffic---------------------------------------------------------------------35 Table 10. Mitigation Measure Offset; Total New Trips Equivalent--------------------------------57 � F�re�sr�,r.c C� Hi)LT & ULLE'L'IC� Vail Transportation Master Plan Update LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A TRAFFIC COUNTS APPENDIX B EXISTING LOS CALCULATIONS APPENDIX C DETAILED TRAVEL TIME DATA APPENDIX D FRONTAGE ROAD COLLISION DIAGRAMS APPENDIX E DEVELOPMENT AND TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES APPENDIX F SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD CROSS-SECTION IN LIONSHEAD APPENDIX G CONCEPTUAL LAYOUTS OF IMPROVEMENTS PLAN APPENDIX H IMPROVEMENT COST ESTIMATES � F�re�sr�,r.c C� Hi)LT & ULLE'L'IC� Vail Transportation Master Plan Update EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Town of Vail continues to experience growth through new development and the redevelopment of older commercial and residential buildings. Recently, the Town has been involved in planning significant redevelopment projects including West Vail, Ever Vail, the Lionshead Parking Structure, and Timber Ridge. Numerous other developments have been either recently approved, are under construction, or have made application to the Town. In addition, Town staff has assessed the redevelopment potential for numerous other sites; the culmination of all these development and redevelopment projects will collectively add noticeable demand (approximately 2,000 trips per hour at peak times) on the Town's transportation system. This study was initiated by the Town to assess the nature of the increased transportation demands placed on the Town's systems by all potential development/redevelopment as well as that from other regional growth. The study focuses on the Town's Frontage Road System, but considerations for transit service and parking are also addressed towards the development of a comprehensive plan. This study also serves to provide the following: ► Establishment of a Frontage Road improvements plan from which to develop appropriate transportation improvements for the Town's primary road system. ► Develop a transportation demand management measures to reduce peak traffic flows during the winter. ► Develop a Frontage Road Access Management Plan with support from CDOT for all future access points along the North and South Frontage Roads. ► Identify a strategy and establish direction towards developing a Town parking plan and a transit plan given potential growth. Existing Conditions A significant amount of traffic data have been collected in support of developing this plan. The data were collected over a host of holidays and spring break time periods to reflect peak conditions. Further, roadway/intersection capacity analyses accounted for less than ideal weather conditions indicative of mild snow and wet pavement. The analyses of existing traffic conditions led to the following: ► The interchanges tend to be the most critical components in the Town's system. Besides providing access to/from I-70, the interchanges are also the only points within Town where traffic can cross I-70. This concentration of traffic through these bottleneck areas negatively effect travel time for drivers and for transit service. ► At peak times, drivers are challenged to turn left onto the Frontage Road (either north or south) from a side street. The nature of the challenge varies by cross-street and section of Frontage Road, but there are numerous locations where drivers attempting such a left turn experience delay. Again, this effects transit operations where bus routing is required to turn left onto the Frontage. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT �ti ULLE1�'IC� Pagei Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Parking in Vail has been a high profile issue for many years during peak times. The Town operates two parking structures capable of accommodating 2,500 vehicles. In addition, the Town has established Ford Park for permit parking and allows parking on the South Frontage only when overFlow conditions occur. Frontage Road parking tends to occur 15 to 30 times per winter season depending on conditions (the Town's goal is to achieve 15 days or less per season). Additional parking is needed to better accommodate the frequency of peak days during ski season. The transit service provided by Vail is heavily used. The Town has some of the highest ridership in the state with six outlying routes and a central "spine" route referred to as the In- Town shuttle. The East Vail outlying route often experiences capacity conditions in the morning (inbound) and in the evening (outbound) due to high demand. The two West Vail routes, which travel in a clockwise and counter-clockwise fashion through the West Vail area, provide needed mobility for areas along both sides of I-70, but the interstate is a barrier in providing efficient service to all areas in West Vail. The In-town route is by far the busiest route on the system and it provides frequent service between and within the Lionshead and Vail Village areas. Busy times see the route at capacity as the Town adds buses to maintain frequent service and increase capacity. Delays are often experienced at the Golden Peak area and at the Frontage Road within Lionshead Village (due to the need to turn left onto the Frontage Road). The location of parking areas with respect to commercial uses and ski portal usage is not in a precise balance. The ski mountain lies toward the eastern end of central Vail (Lionshead and the Village), yet over half of the parking is located in the western portion of Main Vail. Similarly, there is far more commercial use in Vail Village than in Lionshead further adding to the unbalanced situation of parking demand and supply. Projected Conditions The Town is anticipating a significant amount of growth in the next five to ten years. Considering approved development, submitted development proposals, and potential redevelopment proposal in the future, the Town could experience an additional units and square feet of commercial uses. The combination of this additional development is projected to add approximately 2000 PM peak hour trips onto Vail's roadway system during peak times in the winter. The consequences of the combined traffic impact of the development will significantly impact mobility within Vail, particularly during snowy weather. Transit will also be affected negatively as buses travel along the same roadways and will pass through the same congested intersections as general traffic. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT �ti ULLE1�'IC� Pageii Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Specifically, the following issues are anticipated during peak hours of peak season: ► Long delays and long lines of vehicles stacked along the westbound off-ramp at the Main Vail interchange (attempting to enter the north roundabout) ► Long delays and long lines of vehicles stacked along the westbound South Frontage Road at the South Main Vail interchange intersection (attempting to enter the south roundabout) ► Significant delays for motorists turning left onto the Frontage Road at numerous cross streets in the Main Vail area and in the West Vail area. ► Significant delay for motorists turning left from the Frontage Road onto Vail Valley Drive due to the peculiar stop sign configuration. ► Long delays and long lines of vehicles stacked along the westbound North Frontage Road at the West Vail interchange intersection (attempting to enter the north roundabout) Numerous options were considered to correct these issues. Some options were intended to address a localized issue whereas other options could address a myriad of issues. A consideration of pros and cons for options as well as other analyses, have led to the recommended plan shown in Figure ES-1 and ES -2. One of the most crucial improvements recommended in this plan is the proposed Simba Run underpass of I-70. There are numerous mobility benefits that this improvement would provide to the Town including: ► Traffic congestion relief of the West Vail interchange roundabouts. ► Traffic congestion relief of the Main Vail interchange roundabouts. ► Increased flexibility and efficiency to provide transit service to West Vail including a potential for a "line haul" rapid service connecting the Town's major activity centers. ► Accommodation of a trail connection to serve bicycle and pedestrian activity between areas north and south of I-70. ► Improve response time for emergency vehicles. Other needed improvement considerations as part of the plan include: ► Construction of roundabouts along the North and South Frontage Road at strategic locations to accommodate minor street left turn movements onto the Frontage Road at peak times. ► Lane additions as well as signing and roadway lane striping to establish two northbound lanes under I-70 at the West Vail and Main Vail interchanges. ► Expansion of the north roundabout at the Main Vail interchange. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I C� Page iii Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Figure ES-1 Recommended Frontage Road Improvement Plan — Main Vail � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I C� Page iv Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Figure ES-2 Recommended Frontage Road Improvement Plan —West Vail � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & ULLE�°IC� Pagev Vail Transportation Master Plan Update I. INTRODUCTION The Town of Vail continues to experience growth through new development and the redevelopment of older commercial and residential buildings. Recently, the Town has been involved in planning significant redevelopment projects including West Vail, Even Vail ,Timber Ridge, and the Lionshead Parking Structure Redevelopment. Numerous other developments have been either recently approved, are under construction, or are in the development review process (Appendix E shows the list of developments and redevelopments). In addition, Town staff has assessed the redevelopment potential for numerous other sites; the culmination of all these development and redevelopment projects will collectively add noticeable demand on the Town's transportation system. This study was initiated by the Town to assess the nature of the increased transportation demands placed on the Town's systems by all potential development/redevelopment as well as demand from regional growth. The study focuses on the Town's Frontage Road System, but considerations for transit service and parking are also addressed towards the development of a comprehensive plan. This study also serves to provide the following: ► Frontage Road Improvements Plan from which to develop appropriate transportation improvements for the Town's primary road system. ► Transportation demand management measures to consider to reduce peak traffic flows during the winter. ► Frontage Road Access Management Plan with support from CDOT for all future access points along the North and South Frontage Roads. ► Strategy and direction towards developing a Town parking plan and a transit plan given potential growth. The limits of the study area evolved as this planning effort progressed. This study addresses existing and future conditions for the North and South Frontage Road extending from the West Vail interchange to Ford Park including the West Vail and Main Vail Interchanges. The focus of this effort has been on the South Frontage Road along the Villages (Vail and Lionshead Village), but areas such as the West Vail commercial area and the two primary interchanges were analyzed in a bit more detail than other areas within town. The study area is generally shown in Figure 1. Vail recently completed a planning effort, Vail 20/20, in which the community developed a strategic plan to better the community. Transportation considerations were a big piece of the overall strategic plan, and the community authored a paper outlining a strategic direction for the Town's transportation system. The five-page paper summarizes current practices/strategies, future goals, and potential actions to achieve their vision and values. Summary "bullets" from this effort include: � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & ULLE�°IC� Page1 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Figure 1. Town of Vail Study Area � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & ULLE�°IC� Page2 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update ► Maintaining mobility through out Town ► Discourage use of the automobile ► Manage parking demand/supply to reduce overflow parking along the Frontage Road ► Provide necessary support to maintain and embellish the area's transit services. ► Accommodate pedestrian and bicycle activity throughout town ► Reduce the negative impacts of I-70 to the Town such as noise. For the Master Plan effort, progress meetings were held on a regular basis with Town staff, and CDOT was involved in many of the progress meetings as well. The conduct of this study coincided with other major planning efforts within the Town of Vail. These included: ► West Lionshead Redevelopment ► West Vail Redevelopment planning (referred to as Ever Vail) ► Potential redevelopment of the Lionshead Parking Structure Regionally, other transportation planning efforts to consider include: ► Interstate 70 Central Mountain Transportation Corridor Coalition, Draft Recommendations for the I-70 Mountain Corridor on Travel Demand Management prepared by the Northwest Colorado Council of Governments. The document outlines a series of travel demand management strategies designed to shift travel to outside peak times and encourage transit and high occupancy vehicle travel. ► Intermountain 2035 Regional Transportation Plan recognizes the need for the Simba Run underpass, Frontage Road improvements, an inter-modal facility, West Vail Interchange modifications, trail/pedestrian improvements, noise barriers, and various transit items on the preferred plan. However, only transit-related items were listed in the Region's Fiscally Constrained Plan. ► Eagle County Regional Transportation Authority's (ECO) Transit Vision 2030 which encourages appropriate land use patterns, local supplemental bus services, and the potential for an eventual fixed guideway service extending from Gypsum to Vail. ► I-70 Mountain Corridor Programmatic EIS which considered alternatives along I-70 from C-470 to Glenwood Springs. Within Vail, the effort recognizes the potential for a new underpass of I-70 as well as an intermodal site, and widening of I-70 at Dowd Junction. The current draft PEIS also recognizes preservation for future rail service between Denver and Vail's Transportation Center. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & ULLE�°IC� Page3 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update II. EXISTING CONDITIONS Developing a plan to solve future transportation issues first requires a solid foundation of understanding as to where Vail is today relative to transportation. This chapter describes current conditions. A. Traffic Conditions 1. Traffic Volumes - Peak Season Peak hour turning movement counts have been collected at numerous locations throughout Town at various peak time periods; the peak winter time periods were the focus of the collection effort. Intersection turning movement counts were collected over a variety of times including the Christmas holiday, Martin Luther King weekend, Presidents Day weekend, and Spring Break times in 2005 and 2006. AM and PM intersection turning movement counts were collected, and adjustments were made for balancing reasons between successive intersections. Figure 2 shows the existing peak season AM and PM peak hour traffic flows. These represent reconciled traffic counts which were collected over a series of peak times, raw traffic data are shown in Appendix A. The PM peak hour traffic demands tend to be greater than the AM peak hour traffic, but some of the predominant patterns are reversed. During the morning peak hour, movements tend to be oriented toward the parking structures. The interchanges experience far more traffic exiting I-70 than entering during the AM peak hour (versus the PM peak hour). Other characteristics from the data are described as follows: ► The greatest point of traffic concentration within Vail is the Main Vail South Ramps/South Frontage Road/Vail Road roundabout intersection. During the AM peak hour, approximately 2700 vehicles per hour pass through this intersection and 3200 vehicles per hour pass through it during the PM peak hour making it the busiest intersection in town. Of the peak hour traffic passing under I-70 at this point, approximately 35 percent is oriented to/from I-70 east, 25 percent to/from I-70 west, and 40 percent is estimated to simply be crossing I-70. ► The West Vail interchange serves a relatively significant pattern of traffic to/from Down Valley. Given this traffic pattern combined with the traffic generated by the West Vail commercial development, the West Vail north roundabout serves about 2500 vehicles per hour during the PM peak hour, making it the second busiest intersection within Town. Of the peak hour traffic passing under I-70 at this point, approximately 10 percent is oriented to/from I-70 east, 45 percent to/from I-70 west, and 45 percent is estimated to simply be crossing I-70. ► The South Frontage Road carries far more traffic than the North Frontage Road. East of the Main Vail Interchange, the South Frontage Road serves nearly 2000 vehicles per hour at peak times. This is the heaviest traveled roadway segment within Town (other than I-70). Of the 2,000 vehic�es per hour, approximately 30 percent is comprised of trips between the Main Vail roundabout and the Vail Village parking structure. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & ULLE�°IC� Page4 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Figure 2. Existing Peak Season Traffic � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & ULLE�°IC� Page5 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update The interchanges, West and Main Vail, are locations of significant traffic concentration because they not only serve as the access to/from I-70, they are also the only means of crossing I-70. As roundabout intersections, the ramp terminal intersections also serve through movements along the Frontage Roads which further contributes to the traffic concentration that takes place at these points. The notable heavier-traveled cross-streets during peak times including: ► Lionshead Parking Structure Access — Heavier demand is due to this being a major parking area within Town. ► Village Parking Structure Access — Heavier demand is due to this being a major parking area within Town. ► Vail Valley Drive— Heavy demand can be attributed to activity associated with the Golden Peak lift area and associated programs that are based from here. Numerous other cross-streets intersect with the Frontage Roads, but many of these serve localized areas and do not carry significant levels of traffic. The Frontage Roads serve as Vail's arterial system serving the vast majority of the vehicle-miles traveled within the Town. 2. Intersection Levels of ervice (LOS) Intersection Levels of Service (LOS) were calculated for numerous intersections including the roundabouts at the interchanges and many of the cross-street intersections and access points along the North and South Frontage Road. For nearly every case, the PM peak hour traffic was the focus of the LOS analyses. The one exception includes the Main Vail interchange intersections where the AM peak hour was also analyzed since this interchange experiences a concentration of traffic. LOS is a traffic qualitative measure described by a letter designation ranging from A to F. LOS A represents minimal or no delay while LOS F represents excessive delay. The calculations are geared toward estimating the delays for traffic movements and then converting the results to a LOS measure (based on the Highway Capacity Manual published by the transportation Board) with the following: ► LOS A, 0-10 seconds for STOP-sign controlled movements, 0-10 for roundabouts ► LOS B, 10-15 seconds for STOP-sign controlled movements, 10-25 for roundabouts ► LOS C, 15-25 seconds for STOP-sign controlled movements, 25-35 for roundabouts ► LOS D, 25-35 seconds for STOP-sign controlled movements, 35-55 for roundabouts ► LOS E, 35-50 seconds for STOP-sign controlled movements, 55-80 for roundabouts ► LOS F, greater than 50 seconds for STOP-sign controlled movements, 80 for roundabouts The roundabout intersections are located at the Main Vail and West Vail interchanges, and their operation has an impact on the ease of access to/from I-70 as well as the ability to cross I-70. If the roundabout intersections don't function well, the Town's entire transportation system suffers. Because they are critical junctures, the levels of service were calculated for inclement weather conditions. Results for all of the LOS calculations are shown in Figure 3, and worksheets are presented in Appendix B. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & ULLE�°IC� Page6 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update For the roundabouts, the software package Sidra was used to estimate the LOS's. Parameters in this software package were adjusted in attempt to calibrate delay results against delays that were observed in the field at the West Vail interchange. Further, adjustments were made to try and account for poor weather. The following adjustments were made to SIDRA as part of a calibration process: THIS TO BE REWRITTEN SUBJECT TO NEW VERSION OF SIDRA. ► Lane storage lengths and diameters were adjusted to match field conditions ► Approach speeds were reduced from the default of 40 MPH to 25 MPH ► Approach distances were reduced from the default of 1800 feet to 400 feet. ► Heavy vehicle percentages were increased from the default of 2 percent to 5 percent ► Peak hour factors were reduced For Vail, acceptable operations were established at a LOS C or better. Typical LOS threshold objectives in larger busy urban areas are usually LOS D, sometimes LOS E, during peak hours of the day. In extreme cases, LOS F is tolerated. Smaller rural communities will tend to establish LOS C as their criterion objective relative to traffic operations along their streets. A LOS C/LOS D threshold, for peak hours during peak seasons, was chosen as the appropriate threshold for Vail given its resort stature and the desire to provide a highly functional transportation system to enhance the guest experience. Exceptions for poorer LOS that would be acceptable include inclement weather in which a LOS D/LOS E is considered acceptable. In addition, a LOS D or even worse is acceptable for a movement with extremely low traffic flows. The LOS for the STOP-controlled intersections were calculated using the Highway Capacity Manual procedures per HCS software. Figure 3 shows the LOS results. The roundabout intersections all currently operate at acceptable LOS's with each approach being at a LOS C or better. Several of the Frontage Road cross-street intersection movements operate poorer than LOSC. Intersections with a LOS E or LOS F include: ► Village Structure Access —The specific traffic operation issue here is the ability to turn left out of the structure onto the South Frontage Road. The LOS estimate at peak times is LOS E. The delay incurred by these drivers exiting the parking structure is above and beyond the delay they likely incur within the structure to pay the parking fee. In fact, the fee booths inside the structure tend to meter outbound traffic. Otherwise, the outbound peak hour traffic counts would likely be greater. ► Lionshead Structure Access —The outbound movement from the structure experiences a LOS D during peak times. Similar to the Village Structure Access intersection, these drivers are incurring additional delay beyond waiting in the structure to pay the fee. ► East Lionshead Circle —The East Lionshead Circle approach to the South Frontage Road operates at LOS E during peak times. This movement includes In-Town shuttle vehicles, and this intersection's poor operations has a negative impact on the Town's transit system. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & ULLE�°IC� Page7 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Figure 3. Existing Levels of Service � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & ULLE�°IC� Page8 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update ► Safeway Access — In West Vail, there are numerous access points onto the North Frontage Road serving retail uses. The access in front of the Safeway is the heavier-used access based on the traffic count data. As such, the access approach onto the North Frontage Road operates at a LOS E during peak times. The East Lionshead Circle access operation has an effect on the In-town Shuttle bus routes as this bus is required to turn left onto the Frontage Road as part of its normal scheduled route. The Vail Valley Drive intersection does not have any movements operating in LOS E or LOS F, but interestingly this intersection is characterized with a greater number of movements subject to delay. Total vehicular delay at this intersection is greater than most the other intersections in Town due to the unique stop configuration. (Frontage Road approaches both stops, Vail Valley Drive approach is given the right-of-way due to grade). In addition to intersection LOS calculations, Town staff has also recorded travel times between activity areas. Staff made numerous runs between activity areas during peak, non-peak, and under varying weather conditions. Table 1 summarizes average travel times between the key activity areas, and the detailed data collected are presented in Appendix C. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & ULLE�°IC� Page9 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Table 1. 2005-2006 Season Travel Time Summar Peak Season Non-Peak Season Origin/ Destination/Route Non-Peak PM Peak Non-Peak PM Peak Hour Hour Hour Hour Village Structure to Safeway South Frontage Road -Clear 7:11 -Wet 8:01 -Snowpack 7:21 12:08 North Frontage Road -Clear 5:32 5:47 -Wet 8:52 -Snowpack 5:57 8:33 I-70 -Clear 4:57 -Wet 4:32 -Snow ack Safeway to Village Structure North Frontage Road -Clear 5:40 5:56 -Wet -Snowpack Lionshead Parking Structure to Safeway South Frontage Road -Clear 4:45 4:57 5:19 -Wet 5:25 -Snowpack 4:59 4:52 North Frontage Road -Clear 5:53 -Wet 6:23 -Snowpack 10:49 6:55 I-70 -Clear 4:50 -Wet 5:17 -Snow ack Safeway to Lionshead Parking Structure South Frontage Road -Clear 4:45 5:50 -Wet -Snowpack Red Sandstone Road to Cascade WB Frontage Route -Clear 5:31 -Wet 7:25 -Snowpack 5:40 EB Frontage Route -Clear 5:32 -Wet 6:45 -Snowpack 5:51 � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & ULLE�°IC� Page10 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update 3. Accident Data Approximately six years worth of traffic accident data were compiled from the Town of Vail Police Department's records which identified 288 accidents occurring between 1999 and 2005. CDOT data were also explored, but the Town's accident records identified more accidents than that from CDOT's database along the Frontage Roads. It is likely that many of the accidents recorded by the Town along the Frontage Roads do not reach CDOT for inclusion in their database. As such, the Town's Police Department records were used in this analysis. The data are summarized in Table 2. Collision diagrams of each intersection are shown in Appendix D. Observations of interest generally included: ► South Frontage Road/Matterhorn Circle— Recently, this intersection was improved to include an exclusive turn lane. This widening is thought to have provided a significant benefit to any safety issues at this intersection since the data show that most of the accidents at this location occurred in 2002 or earlier. ► West Vail Interchange, North roundabout intersection —A fairly pronounced pattern of rear-end collisions along the I-70 westbound off-ramp show up in the data. Many of these occurred with a slick roadway surface, and the downgrade of the ramp may be a contributor to this pattern of collisions. ► Vail Valley Drive—A noticeable pattern (approximately two-thirds of the accidents) at this intersection includes collisions with eastbound through movement vehicles. The collision diagram suggests that eastbound Frontage Road drivers do not always understand that they are subject to stopping and that the side-street approach has the right-of-way. ► The Main Vail Interchange experienced a fair number of accidents within the study period, but when compared against the "exposure" of traffic, the accident occurrence at this interchange is not alarming. ► Approximately 40 percent of all traffic accidents recorded along the Frontage Roads, including the roundabouts and the cross-street intersections, occurred on slick roadway surfaces. The Colorado Department of Transportation maintains accident statistics along all of its roadway facilities and typically produces average accident rate statistics stratified by facility type. The rates are determined by segment rather than by intersection and the Department typically calculates the number of accidents per million-vehicle-miles of travel for a given segment of road. As such, it is not possible to directly compare the results in Table 2 to industry standards. However it is possible to convert the data in Table 2 into segment data to allow for a comparison to CDOT data. Assumptions have been made with respect to daily traffic from the peak hour traffic counts. In addition, continuous traffic data from CDOT's files were used to estimate seasonal variations in daily traffic data toward estimating the total annual traffic served by each segment. Of the state highway locations with continuous traffic count data, US 6 near Keystone was used for this assessment with respect to seasonal variations. The following shows the converted accident data and how it compares with CDOT data for urban minor arterial road facilities. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & ULLE�°IC� Page11 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Table 2. Vail Frontage Road Accident Summary - Six Years Percentage Accidents Rear- Run due to per Million Intersection End Broadside Off Other Total Slick Vehicles Comments Road Roads Enterin South Frontage Road West Vail South 2 3 0 0 5 20% Roundabout 0.5 W. Gore Creek Drive 2 5 3 1 11 55% 1.3 Matterhorn 13 4 7 1 25 36% 2.8 Westhaven Drive 1 4 4 0 9 56% 1.0 Forest Road 5 1 1 1 8 38% 1.0 W. Lionshead Circle 8 4 0 3 15 33% 1.9 E. Lionshead Circle 10 4 2 1 17 53% 2.0 Lionshead Parking 4 1 3 1 9 22% 0.9 Main Roundabout 8 5 2 5 20 15% 0.9 Village Center Drive 0 1 0 2 3 67% 0.2 Vail Transportation 10 7 0 2 19 16% 1.4 Center Access Vail Valley Drive 4 9 0 2 15 13% 1.6 2�3 accidents involve EB vehicle perhaps not stoppin Ford Park East Parking 1 2 0 0 3 33% 0.7 Lot Vail Valley East Drive 1 1 1 5 8 25% 1.8 Aspen Lane 0 0 6 7 13 31% Possible speeding and/or lighting issues in this area � FEI.SI3l iI�C e �� rl C�L T 4`� L�LLEVIC.� Page 12 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Percentage Accidents Rear- Run due to per Million Intersection End Broadside Off Other Total Slick Vehicles Comments Road Roads Enterin North Frontage Road Arosa Road 0 1 3 0 4 75% All on outside of curve- 75% in adverse weather West Vail North 14 19 1 1 35 34% 2.5 Large % of accidents at I-70 off Roundabout ramp- possibl speed Buffehr Creek 2 3 1 0 6 83% 0.5 Post Office 10 2 0 0 12 83% Nearly all involve outbound vehicle on slick surface. Lions Ridge Loop 6 2 1 0 9 44% 0.9 Red Sandstone Road 13 4 4 1 22 73% 2.p 7 rear ends occur on Southbound a proach Main Vail Roundabout 13 10 1 1 25 40% 2.2 � FEI.SI3l iI�C e �� rl C�L T 4`� L�LLEVIC.� Page 13 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update ► N. Frontage Road, Chamonix to Buffehr Creek— 3.5 accidents/million vehicle-miles ► N. Frontage Road, Buffehr Creek to Main Vail — 3.0 accidents/million vehicle-miles ► S. Frontage Road,. Chamonix to Forest Road —2.2 accidents/million vehicle-miles ► S. Frontage Road, Forest Rd. to Vail Road - 3.5 accidents/million vehicle-miles ► S. Frontage Road, Vail Rd. to Vail Valley Drive — 2.8 accidents/million vehicle miles Based on the most recent CDOT data available, urban minor arterial state highways have experienced 3.45 and 4.08 accidents per million vehicle-miles of travel in 2003 and 2002, respectively. The accident rates listed above for the Frontage road segments fall within the CDOT range or are less expect for the segment between Vail Road and Vail Valley Drive which is slightly higher than the CDOT data. This segment of roadway is the busiest road section in Town (other than I-70), and increased traffic increases the exposure and occasionally the accident rate. Two of the top six accident occurrence intersections are located within this short segment. B. Parking Currently, the Town owns and maintains two large parking structures in Main Vail. The Village Structure, located east of the Main Vail interchange, provides for 1300 spaces for skiers and in support of activity at Vail Village. During ski season, a fee is assessed to park during the day if a vehicle stays at least an hour and a half. Employees and residents have an option of purchasing seasonal parking passes, each providing a different set of privileges. Without a pass, an all-day fee is currently $18.00. This structure generally fills between 50 and 70 times per season and occasionally during summer activities (when parking is free). When full, drivers are directed to the Lionshead Parking Structure. The Village Structure also serves as the Town's Transportation Center serving a variety of bus and transportation services. The Lionshead parking structure is located approximately one-half mile west of the Main Vail interchange. It can accommodate 1200 vehicles. During winter season, the Lionshead structure generally fills only after the Village Structure fills. The structure fills an estimated 20 to 40 times per season, and once full, vehicles are directed to parallel-park along the South Frontage Road. Peak days can sometimes see over 1000 vehicles parked along the South Frontage Road. The location of the parking supply within the Main Vail area (Lionshead and Vail Village) is not entirely in alignment with the parking demand generators. The Lionshead parking structure contains only slightly less than the Village Structure, but there is considerably more demand generation in the Village area. The following illustrates the imbalance: ► Village Structure • 1300 spaces of supply • 300,000 square feet of commercial services being served • Approximately 55 percent of the lift capacity � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & ULLE�°IC� Page14 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update ► Lionshead Structure • 1200 spaces of supply • 150,000 square feet of commercial services being served • Approximately 45 percent of the lift capacity The ski area is oriented easterly from the Main Vail interchange. The Vail Village parking structure is approximately located at a central point to the ski area on the mountain. The Lionshead parking structure is skewed to the west of the ski area. Because of their relative locations, skiers tend to fill the Village Structure before the Lionshead Structure. General parking demand for the Village Structure is further highlighted by the fact that there is more commercial space nearby and that the lift capacity is greater than that in Lionshead. Other parking areas are also provided throughout town, but most are relatively small providing up to 15 spaces. Other locations such as Ford Park and the Soccer Fields (located east of Golden Peak) can accommodate more vehicles, but these are restricted to permitted vehicles only. The Town of Vail has continued to explore means of adding public parking to the supply within the central areas of Lionshead and Vail Village. A current need of at least 400 additional spaces has been identified by the Town in attempt to reduce the number of days that the Frontage Road is pressed into service to accommodate overflow parking. The 400 spaces are needed to maintain a supply accommodating 90 percent of the demand days, a Town parking objective. This is based on many seasons of collected Frontage Road parking data. However, 1,000 additional spaces would accommodate 99 percent of the current demand days. Over the long- term (20 years), the 1,000 spaces are estimated to accommodate 90 percent of the future demand days. More detail with respect to further parking needs is described later in this report, but the Town's ultimate goal is to add 1,000 spaces for general public use. C. Transit The Town of Vail operates a free bus service for residents and guests. The service is among the busiest in the state serving approximately three million riders per year. The heaviest used route is the In-Town shuttle which continuously travels between Lionshead and Vail Village; this route makes up 60 to 70 percent of the Towns bus service ridership, and it typically served with five to seven buses; peak times can see 10 to 12 buses traveling along this route depending on time of day with headways ranging from 5 to 7 minutes. Outlying bus routes each serve a different area of Vail. The East Vail and West Vail bus routes experience the most ridership outside the In-Town Shuttle. West Vail, having a frontage road along the north and south side of I-70, is served by opposing loop service in which one West Vail route runs clockwise along the South and North Frontage Road and the other runs counter- clockwise. While these two routes have offset start times from the Transportation Center, buses along these two opposing routes cross in the Meadow Creek/Intermountain area, and this area receives relatively infrequent service only because two buses drive by at the same time. Most � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & ULLE�°IC� Page15 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update outlying areas are provided service every 15 to 20 minutes; the Meadow Creek/Intermountain area, in which the opposing West Vail bus routes cross, experiences service every 30 minutes (albeit with two buses). This quirk in the service is the result, in part, of limited I-70 crossings and the need to serve both sides of I-70. Existing Transit routes are presented in Figure 4. Other characteristics of the Town's bus system include: ► Heavy end-of-the-day-use of the In-town shuttle as skiers utilize this service to return to their parked vehicle or residence. ► Congestion at the Golden Peak portal; this creates delay to the In-Town shuttle. This is most prevalent on Saturdays during special events. ► Challenges with the In-town shuttle serving the western-most reaches of Lionshead due to delays associated with making a left turn movement onto the Frontage Road (from East Lionshead Circle). ► Outlying bus routes that serve Main and West Vail are subject to passing through the interchanges which can add delay to the service. ► West Vail routes experience overloading mostly at Timber Ridge during morning hours. The West Vail Green route (which is clockwise) also experiences overloading in the evening between the West Lionshead Plaza and the residential areas west of Cascades. ► The East Vail bus route is overloaded during peak hours with inbound riders in the morning and outbound in the afternoon. The Transportation Center, located atop the Village Parking Structure, is at its capacity. Besides Town routes, this Center also serves the Eagle County bus system, charter services, regional services as well as other transportation providers. The Center also serves as a location to switch out buses during the day and as a place for drivers to take a break. The increase in ridership amongst all providers has maxed-out the facility's capacity, and potential increases in transit use in the future has the Town considering a second transportation center facility somewhere. This is discussed in a later chapter of this report. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & ULLE�°IC� Page16 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Figure 4. Existing Vail Bus System � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & ULLE�°IC� Page17 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update III. ANTICIPATED GROWTH A. Development As mentioned, the Town initiated this effort to ascertain the impacts of foreseen and potential growth throughout the Vail Valley. The growth includes the following: ► Development that is currently under construction, ► Development that has been approved by the Town, but had not yet been constructed, ► Development that has been submitted to the Town for consideration, but not yet approved, and ► Parcels of land that have the potential for redevelopment for more density. Town staff have carefully considered parcels throughout town subject to being developed or redeveloped. While these land uses are intended to represent year 2025 conditions, the expectation is that much of the development and redevelopment assumed in this report will occur within the next five years. Appendix E shows the specific details, but overall anticipated growth can be characterized as follows: ► net new residential and hotel units ► replaced residential units ► net square feet of retail development ► square feet of other commercial development (including office) Areas within Town that are anticipated to experience the greatest amount of growth include the following: ► West Vail —The existing shopping center has the potential of being redeveloped to include approximately 130,000 square feet of additional commercial space than currently exists and a net increase of approximately 210 units. ► West Lionshead (currently referred to as Ever Vail) —This includes redeveloping the Vail Resorts maintenance yards and relocating the South Frontage Road up against I-70. Current plans are still evolving, but the potential exists for approximately 335 units, 115,000 square feet of commercial space, and a new ski lift. The proposal would also include additional public parking (400 spaces). ► Timber Ridge —This is redevelopment of an employee housing complex located on the north side of I-70 approximately just west of the Post Office. This complex could include 403 new units and the redevelopment of another 198 units. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & ULLE�°IC� Page18 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update ► Lionshead Parking Structure —The Town is currently proposing to entirely replace the Lionshead Structure with a larger structure (adding 300 more public spaces), approximately 385 units, 50,000 square feet of commercial space, and 15,000 square feet for a performing arts center. Most of the other development considered in this report is comprised of numerous smaller parcels, many of which are located within the Lionshead area and the Vail Village area. B. Parking The additional needed parking supply is based on historic parking counts (along the Frontage Road during peak days) and on projected demands tied to growth within the region and along the Front Range. Since the 2000-2001 ski season, the 15th highest parking day (Vail's objective design level) has produced anywhere from 214 to 541 average number of vehicles parked along the Frontage Road (when it is pressed into service) has ranged from 325 vehicles to 483 with an average of about 350 vehicles. The 10th highest day has averaged approximately 465 vehicles of overflow parking since the 2000-2001 ski season. From this, the Town has identified the need to establish another 400 spaces over the short-term planning horizon. The Ever Vail development project may fulfill this need, but these additional spaces would be west from the primary parking demand generators. Over the longer term, the expectation is that an increase in population and employment (locally, regionally, and state-wide) will only add to the parking demands that Vail will need to accommodate. The following describes, given rough assumptions, the nature of additional parking demand in Vail over the long-term. ► Local Skier Market Passes —The Town estimates that jobs within Eagle County could approximately double by the year 2030, but that merchant pass holders may increase at a rate less than this, say 60%. This would produce 3000 more merchant pass holders. Assuming 30 percent use their pass on a peak day, approximately 900 new pass holder skiers would visit Vail on a peak day. Assuming 50 percent use their car at two persons per vehicles, an additional demand of 225 parked vehicles would be generated. ► Eagle County Part Time Resident—Approximately 12,000 additional units are planned throughout Eagle County; approximately 2000 of these will be affordable homes. Of the other 10,000, it is estimated that 30 percent of the homes would be occupied at peak times with an average occupancy of three people per unit. Assuming 10 to 12 percent of these people ski at Vail and 50 percent utilize their automobile with three people per vehicle, an additional demand of 175 parked vehicles would be generated. ► Front Range Visitors —The Front Range population is projected to increase by one million persons in the next 20 years or so, and 10 to 15 percent of this increase is estimated to be skiers. This could add 125,000 prospective skiers to the Colorado market. Currently, a peak day could see Vail serving 0.5 percent of this market, or the equivalent of 600 to 700 additional skiers. Assuming 95 percent reach Vail via automobile at three people per car, this component would generate an additional demand of 200 parked vehicles. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & ULLE�°IC� Page19 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update ► Employees —The number of jobs within Eagle County is projected to increase significantly by 2030. Within Vail, new development is estimated to add 3600 jobs. With 30 percent of these employees being housed within town, 2520 employees would be out of town needing transportation. Employees are also subject to shifts and do not work everyday. As such, they do not generate the concentrated parking demand that other users above might. Further, assuming 50 percent drive at two persons per vehicle, an estimated additional parking demand of approximately 325 vehicles. In considering the combination of the above four components, an estimated 925 spaces would be needed to accommodate growth over the next 20 to 25 years. When adding in the 400 spaces needed to address current parking shortfalls, a total of 1325 spaces could potentially be necessary. However, a planning level of 1000 spaces is considered appropriate when considering: ► The managing of parking may be more aggressive in the future ► Some of the employee-generated parking demand may be served on-site ► A portion of the part-time residents may participate in "parking clubs" ► The potential of some double counting in the 4 components above. The long-term "target" of providing an additional 1000 spaces is appropriate for the Main Vail area. Areas where this supply may be increased are described as follows: ► Ever Vail Redevelopment. A range of 200 to 500 public spaces have been identified for this area. The analysis presented herein assumes 400 public spaces (which is consistent with current development plans). To the extent possible, the Town should pursue as much as is reasonably possible, realizing that access to/from the Frontage Road (roundabout intersection desired as previously described) and bus stop facilities will also be necessary. ► Lionshead Structure. If this is redeveloped, a total of over 2,000 parking spaces will be provided as part of this development. Over 600 of these spaces will be dedicated to the development, but over 1,400 would be available for public use (a 200 to 300 space increase). This too, along with a possible transit center, will drive the need for a major intersection onto the Frontage Road, perhaps being served via a roundabout as previously described. ► Ford Park. Potentially, 300 to 600 new spaces could be provided in a structure at Ford Park. Transit service connecting it to the Village would be necessary during winter, but the parking could also be used for various events at the park at other times of the year. Between these three areas, the potential exists for the Town to add far more than the minimum 400 spaces in a manner that allows the parking supply to be spread around the Main Vail area. However, most of the new spaces would be located in Lionshead or the western side of the Main Vail area. As mentioned, most skiers vie to access the mountain through Vail Village since most of the ski area is oriented to the east of the Villages. While the additional parking supply in the Main Vail area would be a boon to the Main Vail area, it may better serve the Main Vail area � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I c� Page 20 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update if most of the new supply was located in Vail Village rather than Lionshead (east rather than west). C. Inter-Relationship of the Various Modes Clearly, a cohesive transportation system requires integration of all modes of travel. Public parking areas, for example, naturally attract traffic and can experience heavy concentrations of traffic depending on size and location. In addition, the parking areas are also candidates for transit service, especially where parking areas are located away from prime uses. Because Vail's "base" area is large and spread across multiple vi�lages parking areas are also spread across the villages along the Frontage Road. So the planning for one mode affects another; parking attracts traffic and requires frequent transit service at peak times. Areas that can accommodate large amounts of parking are limited at Main Vail, so their locations are somewhat predetermined. This, in turn, shapes the traffic and transit patterns and service that is needed. The modes are also interrelated in that improvements to alleviate traffic delays and congestion also help transit service as buses are part of the traffic mix. Also, the policy on how parking is managed can affect traffic and transit demands and the trade-off thereof. Vail's Transportation and Parking Committee continuously monitor parking trends and develop strategies to help alleviate parking problems within town. These strategies can have an impact on how many users are willing to drive versus utilizing transit or another mode. As such, parking policy, management, and location directly impact traffic demands and transit demands. These in turn drive service plans to meet needs. The process is dynamic. Traffic, transit, and parking, while inter-related, also need to be appropriately planned with respect to the ski area and its access as well as the commercial development. Future plans for Main Vail will increase commercial space as follows: ► Vail Village—from 300,000 to 350,000 square feet ► Lionshead Village —from 150,000 to 250,000 square feet ► West Lionshead (Ever Vail) -from 80,000 to 120,000 square feet (possibly more) In addition, West Lionshead is anticipated to be served by a new ski lift onto the mountain. Additional parking areas are possible at Ford Park, Lionshead Parking Structure (as part of potential redevelopment), and West Lionshead. The new lift and the new parking areas have the potential of attracting traffic to that localized area and each warrant consideration for transit service embellishments. In essence, the addition of parking, commercial space, and skier access to Main Vail and the fact that each of these will be more spread out than current conditions requires embellishments to the transportation system with respect to carrying traffic and providing transit service. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & ULLE�°IC� Page21 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update IV. PROJECTED 2025 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC CONDITIONS A. Traffic Volume Forecasts Projected traffic demands along the Frontage Road system are key to assessing and mitigating future transportation conditions. As mentioned, the PM peak hour traffic is generally heavier than the AM peak hour, with a few pattern exceptions. As such, year 2025 traffic forecasts have focused on the PM peak hour time period for analysis, the one exception is the Main Vail Roundabout Interchange where AM peak hour forecasts were developed as well. The total PM peak hour forecasts were developed with the use of travel demand model utilizing the TRAFFIX software package. The model was developed by estimating the amount of additional PM peak hour trips for each development and redevelopment proposal, and then assigning these new trips to the street system. Forecasts then resulted from the additive nature of the new trips in combination with the existing traffic which was increased modestly (0.5% per year) to year 2025. The AM peak hour traffic was developed by applying a 35 percent flat growth factor to the existing AM peak hour; the 35 percent was based on the level growth observed from the PM peak hour projections (versus existing). Table 3 shows the trip generation rates that were used and Figure 5 shows the trip distribution assumptions that were used in this analysis. Trip rates were based a combination of sources including the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation and the Lionshead Transportation Master Plan. ITE trips rates were primarily applied to development located away from Vail base areas. Because of the heavy transit use and the fact that much of the development is mixed and close-in (lending itself to walking), the trip generation rates used in this study are less than the ITE rates because the ITE data are intended for more typical suburban settings. Again, Appendix E shows the trip estimates for each of the development areas. In total, all of the considered development could generate an additional 2000 trips per hour during the PM peak hour. The following summarize some of the bigger trip generators: ► West Vail —the net increase in square footage and residential units could generate a total of 470 additional trips during the PM peak hour. This would in above and beyond the estimated 800 to 1000 trips per hour generated by the West Vail development today. ► Timber Ridge is estimated to generate an additional 220 trips per hour during the PM peak hour. ► West Lionshead (Ever Vail) has the potential of generating an additional 600 trips per hour during the PM peak hour. ► Lionshead Parking Structure redevelopment is estimated to generate 350 trips during the PM peak hour. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I c� Page 22 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Figure 5. Trip Assignment Distribution � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I C� Page 23 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update ► The Lionshead Village area is projected to generate an additional 490 PM peak hour trips given the collective development. ► The Vail Village area is projected to generate 260 PM peak hour trips given the collective development potentials. Table 3. Trip Generation Rates Trip Generation Rates (per DU for Res, per 1000 SF otherwise) Use ITE Vail-Remote Vail-Close In Daily peak Daily peak Daily peak Residential - New 5.86 0.54 5 0.5 3 0.3 Residential - Replace NA NA 0.75 0.08 0.45 0.05 Commercial - Office 11.01 1.49 11 1.49 11 1.49 Commercial - Retail 42.94 3.75 ITE ITE 15 1.3 Hospital 17.6 1.18 17.6 1.1 NA NA Figure 6 shows the 2025 total PM peak hour traffic projections at the Town's roundabout intersections and many of the Frontage Road cross-streets. In general, future PM peak hour traffic flows along the frontage roads are projected to increase an estimated 30 to 40 percent over existing traffic flow levels at peak times. The interchanges will experience a greater concentration in traffic with the additional trips. Major cross-streets will still include Vail Valley Drive, both parking structure access points, and West Vail accesses (if access modifications are not constructed). Moderately traveled cross-streets include all of the Lionshead Circles, and Village Drive. B. Traffic Operations Similar to the existing conditions LOS analysis, the roundabout intersections were analyzed for ideal conditions as well as for snow conditions using the same factors and adjustments mentioned before. Figure 7 shows the results of these analyses. Noticeable capacity deficiency highlights include: ► Main Vail Interchange— Both roundabouts are projected to operate at a LOS F during the AM and PM peak hours. ► West Vail Interchange—The north roundabout is projected to operate at LOS E during the PM peak hour. ► Cross-street intersections that are projected to have a LOS F left turn movement include: • Village Parking Structure Access • Lionshead Parking Structure Access • West Lionshead Circle • Vail Valley Drive (left FROM the frontage road) • Matterhorn Circle � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I C� Page 24 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Figure 6. Year 2025 Peak Hour Traffic Projections � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I C� Page 25 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Figure 7. Year 2025 Peak Hour Levels of Service � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I C� Page 26 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update ► Cross-street intersections that are projected to have a LOS E left turn movement include: • West Vail commercial accesses • East Lionshead Circle (which impacts the heavily-traveled In-Town shuttle bus service) • Village Center Drive • West Gore Creek Drive LOS E and LOS F were described in Chapter Two with respect to corresponding motorist delay levels. These poor LOS's indicate that mobility within Vail will be severely limited during busy times. This impacts not only private automobile users within town, but it also will have a significant impact on the Town's ability to provide transit service. Given poor weather conditions, many drivers will be frustrated traveling within Vail, thereby exacerbating a visitor's resort experience. In addition to intersection LOS's, travel time estimates between Safeway and the Village Parking Structure have been developed for the PM peak hour of projected Year 2025 conditions as follows in Table 4. Table 4. Travel Time Comparison Safeway to Village Structure Village Structure to Safeway North Route South Route North Route South Route Existin Ideal 5:30 6:30 6:00 8:00 Snow 7:30 9:00 8:30 10:30 2025 (without any improvements) Ideal 6:30 7:30 8:30 10:00 Snow 9:00 12:30 15:00 14:00 As shown, travel time within Vail during peak times could increase by as mush as 6 to 7 minutes depending on conditions and routing. Much of the additional delay will occur at the intersections where LOS's are anticipated to be poor. Beyond the comparisons shown in Table 4, travel time estimates were also developed between Cascade Village and West Vail. Given the LOS results of Figure 7 (and corresponding delays), year 2025 snowy conditions would require_to minutes of travel between these two areas. Significant travel delay would be incurred by a trip between those two areas at the West Vail interchange roundabouts and through attempting to turn onto the Frontage Road. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I c� Page 27 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update V. IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVES Based on the traffic operations presented in the previous section, improvement alternatives were developed and analyzed relative to their impact on the critical street system components within Town. The critical considerations include the following: ► Main Vail Interchange ► West Vail Interchange ► South Frontage Road from Vail Road to Ford Park (Village Frontage) ► South Frontage Road from Vail Road to Forest Road (Lionshead Frontage) ► West Vail Redevelopment Area Alternatives were identified and analyzed for each of these critical areas to determine the most appropriate alternative (or combination of alternatives) to mitigate projected traffic demands. A. Main Vail Interchange Numerous peak hour traffic patterns are served by this interchange, and many are in direct conflict with each other. The predominant PM peak hour traffic pattern consists of movements from the Village Structure Frontage Road "leg" to the westbound I-70 on-ramp. But other noticeably patterns include movements between the Lionshead leg and the eastbound on ramp, the westbound off ramp and the South Frontage Road (both directions) and movements simply crossing I-70. Alternatives that were considered to alleviate poor LOS's can be categorized as either capacity improvements, travel demand measures, or provision for alternative routes. Tables 5 and 6 were developed to clarify the issues associated with each of the interchange's roundabouts. The tables show realistic improvements as well as supplemental mitigation considerations to achieve acceptable LOS's. Table 5 presents material associated with the north roundabout and Table 6 presents information relative to the south roundabout. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I c� Page 28 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Table 5. Main Vail Interchange North Roundabout - Alternatives Assessment Main Vail Interchange, North Roundabout LOS F projected along WB off-ramp and Spraddle Creek Approach Snow and Ideal Conditions Primary Issue(s): Major traffic conflict is between NB left turn movement(to WB I-70 and Frontage Road) and WB left turn movement from WB I-70. Expand to a full two lane roundabout; add northbound approach Realistic Capacity Improvement(s): lane from under I-70 (possibly reversible lane); add bypass lane from Fronta e Road to WB I-70. Supplemental Traffic Reduction Still need to reduce PM peak hour forecasts by 50 to 100 Needed for LOS D (Snowy): vehicles per hour, or 2 to 4 percent. 2025 Traffic Composition: 30% is from proposed development. Potential Measure Traffic Flow Effect Relative Cost (as Isolated Measure)* Total traffic reduced by 150 to 200 High, but measure would 1. Add Simba Run underpass. vph (6 to 8%). provide other benefits as well. Estimated ramp traffic removed is Low; would require VMS 2. Encourage use of East Vail IC between 100 and 150 vph (4 to along I-70 and along 6% . Bi horn Road. Estimated traffic removed is Low; would impact parking 3.Parking Management Measures between 100 and 150 vph (3 to policy. 5% . 4. Express Bus Service linking West Estimated traffic removed is Vail, Lionshead, and Vail Village between 50 and 100 vph (2 to Medium. 4/o . 5. Extended Skiing Hours Estimated traffic removed is p Low. between 25 and 50 vph (1 to 2/o). 6. Metering of Outbound Structure Estimated traffic removed is Low; toll booths already in Traffic (toll booths) between 50 and 75 vph (2 to 3%). place. Other Considerations Mixed Use Trip Gen Reduction Could reduce intersection's PM �WV�** peak hour traffic by another 25 v h 1% Employee housing auto disincentive Could reduce intersection's PM (Timber Ridge) peak hour traffic by another 25 to 50 vph 1 to 2% * Combining measures will reduce the effect of certain measures as some mitigation measures target the same traffic"group". ** This consideration entails redeveloping the West Vail area to better balance uses and incite internal trip-making. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I C� Page 29 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Table 6. Main Vail Interchange South Roundabout - Alternatives Assessment Main Vail Interchange, South Roundabout LOS F projected along WB Frontage Road Approach and along Vail Road a roach snow . Primary Issue(s): Major movement is WB right turn to under I-70 (much of which is oriented to WB I-70). Largest conflict with this movement includes the combination of movements onto the EB on-ram . Realistic Capacity Improvement(s): Incorporate second northbound lane under I-70 and re-designate WB Frontage Road lanes to utilize it (right, through/right, and left/through). Supplemental Traffic Reduction Still need to reduce PM peak hour forecasts by 50 to 100 vehicles per Needed for LOS D (Snowy): hour, or 1 to 2 percent. Additional reduction may be desirable to rovide excess ca acit for U-turns from/to the west. 2025 Traffic Composition: 25% is from proposed development. Potential Measure Traffic Flow Effect Relative Cost (as Isolated Measure)* Total traffic reduced by 150 to 200 vph (3 High, but measure would 1. Add Simba Run underpass. to 4%). provide other benefits as well. Estimated ramp traffic removed is between 50 and 100 vph (1 to 2%). This Low; would require VMS 2. Encourage use of East Vail IC measure would also create some "shifts" along I-70 and along in traffic entering the roundabout. Bighorn Road. 3. Parking Management Measures Estimated traffic remov ed is between Low; would impact parking 125 and 200 vph (2 to 4/o). policy. 4. Express Bus Service linking West Estimated traffic removed is between 50 Medium. Vail, Lionshead, and Vail Village and 100 vph (1 to 2%). 5. Extended Skiing Hours Estimated traff�ic removed is between 25 Low. and 50 vph (1 /o). 6. Metering of Outbound Structure Estimated traffic removed is between Low; toll booths already in Traffic (toll booths) 100 and 150 vph (2 to 3%). place. Other Considerations Mixed Use Trip Gen Reduction Could reduce intersection's PM peak (WV)** hour traffic by 25 (<1%). Employee housing auto disincentive Could reduce intersection's PM peak (Timber Ridge) hour traffic by another 25 to 50 vph (1%) Hospital Access onto Fr. Road * Combining measures will reduce the effect of certain measures as some mitigation measures target the same traffic"group". ** This consideration entails redeveloping the West Vail area to better balance uses and incite internal trip- making. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I C� Page 30 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Improvements that show promise include: ► Simba Run Underpass. This improvement is estimated to attract 3 to 4 percent of the traffic passing through the south roundabout and 6 to 8 percent of the traffic traveling through the north roundabout. While not significant, the Simba Run Underpass would provide some needed relief to the Main Vail interchange by giving local drivers another option to cross I-70. This is a relatively expensive improvement, and the relief it provides to the Main Vail Interchange alone is probably not enough justification for its construction. However, the Simba Run underpass would provide other benefits such as: • Provide significant relief to the West Vail interchange intersections, • Provide a safe means of crossing I-70 to serve pedestrians and bicyclists, • Allow a greater level of flexibility for the Town's bus system, which would increase the system's efficiency, • Allow faster response time for emergency vehicles ► Widening/enhancing the roundabouts (particularly the north roundabout) to establish continuous double lanes carrying traffic from the Village Frontage Road "leg" to the I-70 West on-ramp "leg". Signing will be crucial with this improvement to clearly guide motorists through the interchange. The roadway below I-70 would need to be striped and signed to clearly show two northbound lanes and one southbound lane. A potential embellishment could be the provision for the center lane to be reversed during the AM peak hour through a dynamic traffic control planning involving temporary barriers and signs, but both roundabouts will need to be properly designed to accommodate this potential. Providing a full four lanes under I-70 would be an ideal long-term consideration when the I-70 bridges are replaced by CDOT (which may not be for many years given CDOT's favorable Sufficiency Rating of these bridges being in the low 90's). ► Alternatives that involve parking management could collectively make a difference as well. With the Town "core" located right at the interchange and much of the public parking associated with "core" activity (skiing, dining, shopping, etc.), the ability to manage afternoon traffic spikes generated from the parking structures can lessen some of the concentration of traffic experienced at the Main Vail interchange. There may be other parking policy and/or economic consequences in applying these management techniques, but properly managing the parking could have an impact on peak demands. ► Encourage use of the East Vail interchange via dynamic signing can also remove an element of the traffic from the Main Vail interchange. The primary means of conveying information to drivers would be via dynamic signing upon exit of the Village Parking Structure and along westbound I-70 prior to the East Vail interchange. The one drawback of this alternative is that it would place more traffic along the Frontage Road east of Ford Park, but this section of Frontage Road has excess capacity as a two-lane road given that it carries less than one-half of the traffic the other Frontage Roads carry. This alternative would be most effective to relieve the AM peak hour time period by intercepting traffic arriving from Vail Pass (which is significant during the AM Period). � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & ULLE�°IC� Page31 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Another consideration listed in the Table 6, but not specifically quantified, is the modification of the Hospital's access. The Vail Valley Medical Center is currently served by Meadow Drive via Vail Road. As such, nearly all of its traffic impacts the south roundabout intersection. The Center is in the planning process to reconfigure its facility such that it would have a primary access directly onto the Frontage Road west of the roundabout across from the Municipal Center. This would "shift" some of this facility's traffic out of the south roundabout and off of the south roadway "leg" (Vail Road) which is projected to operate at a poor LOS. This scheme requires coordination with the other nearby uses' access points, but it could offer a small dose of traffic relief to the heavily-used south roundabout. B. West Vail Interchange The predominant movements through this interchange during the PM peak hour include movements from the North Frontage Road and from the South Frontage Road to westbound I-70. AM peak hour traffic is not much of an issue at this interchange based on the existing counts (as such projections were not even developed). The PM peak hour major movements merge within the north roundabout, and the north roundabout intersection is the most challenging component of the interchange complex. Like the Main Vail interchange bridges, the West Vail I-70 bridges have a very high Sufficiency Rating, and CDOT is not likely to replace these any time soon. Tables 7 and 8 show the effectiveness of various alternatives on the operations of this interchange. A key improvement for this interchange is the establishment of two northbound lanes under I-70 from the south side and maintaining two continuous lanes to westbound I-70. Like the Main Vail interchange, there is adequate width to accommodate these, but striping and signing enhancements will be necessary to clearly convey this lane configuration to drivers. The nature of West Vail being removed from the skiing "core" of Vail results in less effectiveness of the travel demand measures considered in the Main Vail interchange alternatives analysis (including managing traffic demand from the parking structures). The most effective mitigation measure for West Vail would be the construction of a Simba Run underpass. This improvement wou�d remove a 10 to 12 percent of the traffic utilizing the interchange complex. As mentioned, the Simba Run underpass would be an expensive improvement. It would provide some benefit to the Main Vail interchange, but it would provide far more traffic operations benefit to the West Vail interchange. In addition, this underpass's provision for a third crossing of I-70 provides more flexibility for transit service and bus routing as well as provision for pedestrians. A more detailed Simba Run Feasibility Study should be considered to fully flush out all pros and cons associated with the potential improvements project � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I C� Page 32 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Table 7. West Vail Interchange North Roundabout- Alternatives Assessment West Vail Interchan e, North Roundabout LOS F projected along WB Frontage Road Approach and LOS E along SB Chamonix Drive approach snow . Primary Issue(s): Major movement is WB left turn to under I-70, to WB I-70, and NB approach to EB Frontage Road and onto WB I-70. Largest conflict involves NB left turn onto WB I-70 with the left turns from WB Fronta e Road. Realistic Capacity Improvement(s): Add northbound approach lane from under I-70. Should also attem t to add SB Chamonix a roach lane. Supplemental Traffic Reduction Still need to reduce PM peak hour forecasts by 200 to 250 Needed for LOS D (Snowy): vehicles per hour, or 6 to 8 percent. 2025 Traffic Composition: 21% is from proposed development. Potential Measure Traffic Flow Effect Relative Cost (as Isolated Measure)* Total traffic reduced by 400 to 450 High, but measure would 1. Add Simba Run underpass. vph (10 to 12%). provide other benefits as well. Estimated traffic removed is Low; would impact parking 2. Parking Management Measures b�Oween 25 to 50 vpd (less than policy. 3. Express Bus Service linking West Estimated traffic removed is Vail, Lionshead, and Vail Village between 75 and 100 vph (2 to Medium. 3/a). 4. Extended Skiing Hours Estimated traffic removed is less Low. than 25 vph (<1%). 5. Metering of Outbound Structure Estimated traffic removed is Low; toll booths already in Traffic (toll booths) between 25 and 50 vph (1 to 2%). place. Other Considerations Mixed Use Trip Gen Reduction Could reduce intersection's PM �WV�** peak hour traffic by 25 to 50 vph 1% Employee housing auto disincentive Could reduce intersection's PM (Timber Ridge) peak hour traffic by less than 25 vph <1% Could reduce intersection's PM Less West Vail Development peak hour traffic by 25 vph per 10,000 SF reduction in retail. * Combining measures will reduce the effect of certain measures as some mitigation measures target the same traffic"group". ** This consideration entails redeveloping the West Vail area to better balance uses and incite internal trip-making. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°�c� Page 33 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Table 8. West Vail Interchange South Roundabout- Alternatives Assessment West Vail Interchange, South Roundabout LOS F projected along EB Frontage Road Approach (relative minor) and along EB Off-ramp snowy). Primary Issue(s): Major movement is WB right turn to under I-70. This movement's largest conflict includes the eastbound off-ramp left turn to under I- 70. Realistic Capacity Improvement(s): Add northbound approach lane from under I-70. Supplemental Traffic Reduction Still need to reduce PM peak hour forecasts by 100 to 150 Needed for LOS D (Snowy): vehicles per hour, or 3 to 5 percent. 2025 Traffic Composition: 21% is from proposed development. Potential Measure Traffic Flow Effect Relative Cost (as Isolated Measure)* Total traffic reduced by 400 to 450 High, but measure would 1. Add Simba Run underpass. vph (14 to 16%). provide other benefits as well. 2. Parking Management Measures Estimated traffic removed is o Low; would impact parking between 25 and 50 vph (1 to 2/o). policy. 3. Express Bus Service linking West Estimated traffic removed is Vail, Lionshead, and Vail Village between 75 and 100 vph (3 to Medium. 4/o . 4. Extended Skiing Hours Estimated traffic removed is less Low. than 25 vph (<1%). 5. Metering of Outbound Structure Estimated traffic removed is Low; toll booths already in Traffic (toll booths) between 25 and 50 vph (1 to 2%). place. Other Considerations Mixed Use Trip Gen Reduction Could reduce intersection's PM �WV�** peak hour traffic by 25 to 50 vph 1 to 2% Employee housing auto disincentive Could reduce intersection's PM (Timber Ridge) peak hour traffic by less than 25 v h <1% Could reduce intersection's PM Less West Vail Development peak hour traffic by 25 vph per 10,000 SF reduction in retail. * Combining measures will reduce the effect of certain measures as some mitigation measures target the same traffic"group". ** This consideration entails redeveloping the West Vail area to better balance uses and incite internal trip-makin . � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°�c� Page 34 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update C. South Frontage Road - Vail Road to Ford Park This stretch of the South Frontage Road is characterized as being the heaviest traveled segment of Frontage Road in Town (just east of Vail Road) and by heavy cross-street movements, namely the Village Parking Structure and Vail Valley Drive (also known as Blue Cow Chute). Further, the Vail Valley Drive intersection is characterized by a unique stop-sign configuration in which approaches along the Frontage Road are stopped and Vail Valley Drive traffic approaching the intersection is provided the right-of-way. This is unique in that it is the only Frontage Road intersection in Town with this traffic control configuration. As mentioned, some of the accidents that have occurred at this intersection appear to be based on this unique configuration and the fact that drivers traveling along the Frontage Road do not expect the need to stop. Other intersections which exist within this stretch of roadway include bus and top-level parking access points to the Village Structure as well as Village Center Road located just west of the Village Structure. Much of the Frontage Road is five lanes wide, but it narrows to a two- lane section east of Vail Valley Drive. Numerous alternatives (and sub-alternatives) were considered to better accommodate traffic demands along this stretch of Frontage Road. Some of the alternatives were intended to mitigate localized deficiencies like tough-to-make left turn movements onto the Frontage Road. Others are intended to mitigate forecasted deficiencies like traffic generated by a potential major parking area at (or under) Ford Park. Also, the concepts considered look to alleviating some of the difficult left turn movements from the side streets by allowing (or forcing) these drivers to turn right, travel a short distance, and then make use of a new roundabout to u-turn back west, effectively making a left turn onto the Frontage Road Table 9 shows the alternatives and the pros and cons for a variety of alternatives. Table 9. South Frontage Road Alternatives Analysis - East of Main Vail Interchange - 2025 Traffic Intersection PM Peak Hour Level of Service Alternative Village Village Blue Cow New Vail Center Structure Chute Valley Dr. No Action E F F na Signal or Manual Traffic Control at E B F na Village Structure Alt 1 a- Roundabout at Vail Valley Drive E F D na Alt 1 b- Same as 1 a, but make Village Structure 3/4 movement(forcing left outs F (A if 2 lane to turn right and u-turn through E C roundabout) na roundabout) � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°�c� Page 35 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Intersection PM Peak Hour Level of Service Alternative Village Village Blue Cow New Vail Center Structure Chute Valley Dr. Alt 1 c- Same as 1 a, but make Village Center Drive 3/4 movement(forcing left E (A if 2 lane outs to turn right and u-turn through C F roundabout) na roundabout) Alt 2a- One Way Vail Valley Drive with new connection onto Frontage Road near Ford Park (new bridge over Gore E F A F Creek with one way eastbound circulation) Alt 2b- Same as 2a but with one-lane roundabout intersection for the new one- E F A D way out intersection near Ford Park Alt 3a- Roundabout at Village Structure E A F na (2-lane) Alt 3b- Same as 3a, but make Village Center Drive 3/4 movement(forcing left C A F na outs to turn right and u-turn through roundabout) Alt 3d- Same as 3b, but also make Vail F* F* Valley Drive 3/4 movement and add C A (NB right (A if 2 lane another roundabout at west end of Ford Turn only) roundabout) Park to accommodate U-turns. Recommended Alternative (see below)— Ford Park Roundabout, 3/quarter movement of Vail Valley Drive with Lane E B A N/A Addition to Ford Park, Police Control at Village Structure Access � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°�c� Page 36 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update From the Table, it can be seen that 2-lane roundabouts would function well along this stretch of the South Frontage Road. However, this size of roundabout requires a significant amount of space (150 feet minimum diameter). Preliminary roundabout layouts showed that this concept would not properly fit between I-70 and the Parking Structure unless allowance was made to encroach into I-70. Potentially, grade adjustments could be made to I-70 and/or the Frontage Road to accommodate vertical design issues, but the horizontal encroachment of a roundabout into the I-70 mainline would likely not be accepted by CDOT or FHWA officials. Other considerations for this stretch of Frontage Road include: ► Heavy left turn movements from the Village Structure ► Unique traffic control configuration for the Frontage Road/Vail Valley Drive intersection, due in part to the steep upward grade to the Frontage Road (and eliminating a high flow of traffic stopped on a slick roadway slope). ► The potential that Ford Park may be the site of additional parking supply (800 to 1000 spaces) toward meeting the parking shortfall. Given the host of considerations, constraints, and projected traffic operations, the following plan components are recommended: ► Roundabout at Ford Park to serve as a means of"u-turning" (eastbound to westbound) and to potentially serve a future parking structure. ► Restrict the Vail Valley Drive to three-quarter movement (no left out) and add a continuous right turn lane along the South Frontage Road (along the Wren's frontage) allowing for free- flow right turn movements from Vail Valley Drive onto the Frontage Road and extending to Ford Park (and the new roundabout). ► Provide police officer traffic control at the Village Parking Structure during the PM peak hours on peak days of activity. This would effectively serve as a manual traffic signal (but without lights, poles, mast arms, etc.). ► Leave the Village Center Drive intersection as it exists. Drivers attempting to turn left onto the Frontage Road at this location might experience some delay at peak times, but there is the option to instead turn right and travel to the roundabout at Ford Park to "U-turn". This left turn movement is not anticipated to be major. This plan provides the benefits of: ► Converting the South Frontage Road/Vail Valley Drive intersection into a more conventional type of intersection that would provide for free flow along the Frontage Road approaches (and a potentially safer intersection) ► Alleviates the poor LOS of turning left out of the parking structure ► Provides a major access point for Ford Park to serve its activities including events and potentially increased parking (for skiers). � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I C� Page 37 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update D. South Frontage Road - Vail Road to West Lionshead (Ever Vail) This stretch of roadway is also heavily traveled at peak times, especially the segment just west of Vail Road. The major access onto this stretch of road serves the Lionshead Structure. The cross-section of the road at the Vail Road roundabout is five lanes, but this transitions to two lanes west of the Municipal Center (approximately 1000 feet west of Vail Road). As part of the Lionshead Master Plan adopted by the Town in 1998, the section of frontage road west of the Municipal Center is planned to be widened to include a westbound bike lane (also to be used for overflow parking), a center median for left turn movements, and a continuous accel/decel eastbound right turn lane (although two continuous westbound lanes are included as far west as Lionshead Parking Structure). This is shown in Appendix G. Moderately traveled cross-streets in this stretch of roadway include both West Lionshead Circle intersections as well as East Lionshead Circle. The intersection at East Lionshead Circle is also a critical consideration in the master planning of the Frontage Road because it serves Vail's busiest bus route; the In-Town shuttle. These buses are required to turn left onto the Frontage Road from East Lionshead Circle to cover the western Lionshead area, but this can be a difficult left turn movement to make during peak times due to heavy traffic flows along the Frontage Road. Other considerations that play into developing a plan for this stretch of the Frontage Road include the potential redevelopment of the West Lionshead area and associated realignment of the Frontage Road adjacent to I-70. The Ever Vail development proposal is currently under consideration by the Town and it includes this frontage road realignment. Further, the Lionshead Parking Structure is proposed to be redeveloped to include more parking, residential uses, commercial, and potentially community uses, as mentioned. Given these considerations and all of the past planning, improvement alternatives were not specifically considered for this stretch. Rather, the following guidance has been provided to development planners: ► West Lionshead Area (Ever Vail) —With the Frontage Road likely being realigned adjacent to I-70 (in the Forest Road area), the potential exists to incorporate a major intersection in the form of a roundabout. This intersection could be located such that it connects Forest Road and West Lionshead Circle into a common intersection. Potentially, the Forest Road leg could also be a major access for the West Lionshead redevelopment. This would help mitigate that redevelopment's traffic impacts and at the same time better serve the difficult left turn movement onto the South frontage Road from West Lionshead Circle. ► Lionshead Structure Redevelopment— If this entails a total demolition and reconstruction of the current structure, the potential exists to combine its primary access with East Lionshead Circle as a roundabout intersection. This design would better serve the Lionshead Structure in terms of accommodating left turn movements onto the South Frontage Road. This design would also better accommodate left turn movements from East Lionshead Circle onto the Frontage Road, including In-Town shuttle bus movements. The fact that this redevelopment entails an entire "re-do" of the facility could also lend itself to explore grade-separating movements into or out of the parking area from/to the Frontage Road. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I C� Page 38 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update These concepts have been forwarded to the appropriate development design teams for possible integration into their plan. E. West Vail Redevelopment Numerous access options were considered during the planning of the West Vail redevelopment located on the north side of I-70 just east of the West Vail Interchange. A few alternatives that were considered and their disposition were as follows: ► Access Chamonix Lane along the north side of the development. This concept would rely on other intersections to access the North Frontage Road, namely Chamonix Road into the northern leg of the West Vail roundabout and Buffehr Creek Road. However, encouraging most of the redevelopment's traffic onto Chamonix Lane (located along the backside of the West Vail commercial development) will change that roadways local character. Analysis has also revealed that focusing West Vail redevelopment traffic into the roundabout via the north leg (Chamonix Road) would be problematic. As mentioned, the two major traffic streams from the South Frontage Road and from the North Frontage Road to I-70 west merge at this point in the roundabout creating very few gaps for traffic entering the roundabout from the north. ► A series of access points along the West Vail Frontage. This would be similar as exists today for this center. Analysis has indicated that the South Frontage Road's increase in traffic over time will create greater difficulty for drivers attempting to turn left onto the South Frontage Road. Because of this increased difficulty and the potential for increased left turn movements onto the Frontage Road, this option was not pursued. The option that is being recommended includes the establishment of a major access intersection, perhaps in the form of a roundabout. A traffic signal has been raised as a possibility for this major intersection, but the overall community has maintained that traffic signals should not be used in Vail. The precise location of the roundabout can be made in concert with the redevelopment program as needed. Beyond this, a right-in/right out access could possibly be provided on either side of the roundabout intersection, subject to intersection spacing and the closure of the existing access points. The final plan should be clearly coordinated with redevelopment planning efforts and it would likely result in fewer access points onto the Frontage Road. F. Other Improvements Sub-sections A through E in this chapter provide analytic information for mitigation measures at the critical sections with Vail. Beyond these, other cross-street intersection improvements are needed as well based on the projected traffic volumes. These are described as follows: ► Simba Run Underpass Roundabouts —As mentioned, there would be a benefit of providing another crossing of I-70. Several intersection configuration options were assessed for the Simba Run underpass intersections onto the Frontage Roads. Options included straight tee intersections as well as an angled crossing that would favor a continuous traffic flow � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°�c� Page 39 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update between the North Frontage Road west leg and the South Frontage Road east leg (with the two frontage Road legs "teeing" into this continuous frontage road). LOS analyses clearly favored roundabout intersections as minor street left turn movements in the other two options were projected to operate at a LOS F. As single-lane roundabouts, the Simba Run intersections are projected to operate at a LOS B or better during the PM peak hour. ► Based on the State Highway Access Code, turn lanes should be added at the intersections of: • North Frontage Road/Red Sandstone Road — right turn lane and center left turn lane. • North Frontage Road/Lionsridge Loop— center left turn lane • North Frontage Road/Buffehr Creek— center left turn lane One other consideration in Frontage Road improvements is at the Red Sandstone Elementary School. The Frontage Road is two lanes at this location, and there is a concentration of turning movements before and after school. This condition is prevalent when school is in session and involves bus turning activity as well as private vehicles. Because the turning movements are fairly concentrated due to school activity, a center left turn lane should also be considered at the school's entrance. G. Transit Growth within Vail and within Eagle County will require adjustments to Vail's transit service for guests and residents. In addition, the construction of certain roadway improvements, such as the Simba Run underpass of I-70, provides transit routing options for Town buses. The areas of Town that could experience the most growth, and hence the most potential for transit demand increases, is West Vail, Timber Ridge, West Lionshead, throughout the Lionshead Village, and throughout Vail Village. Realizing all of this, options for service could include the following: ► Establishment of a "line-haul" service entailing the routing of buses between the West Vail commercial center, Timber Ridge, West Lionshead, Lionshead, and the Village (and possibly Ford Park). The Simba Run Underpass would be key for this service, and then the complementary bus routes would "feed" those riders to the Line Haul route to serve those who reside away from the Line Haul route. ► Service to West Vail and to outlying areas north of I-70 could be focused around a new transit center at Lionshead. As mentioned, the Village Transportation Center is at its capacity, and the Town is pursuing another site within Lionshead as a means of relief. The Lionshead Transit Center could be that site in which the Sandstone route, the Lionsridge Loop route, and potential opposing-loop West Vail routes are based. Riders served by these routes destined to the Village or Golden Peak could transfer to the In-Town shuttle at the Lionshead Transportation Center. To supplement the additional demand placed on the In- Town Shuttle, a high frequency express route could be provided connecting the two transportation centers as well as West Lionshead given the parking and new ski lift planned in that area; this could effectively be referred to as a Village Express route. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I C� Page 40 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update ► With the possibility of four bus routes terminating at the Lionshead Transportation Center rather than the Village Transportation Center and with the potential for significant parking supply taking place at Ford Park, supplemental service to the already heavily used In-Town Shuttle might make some sense. During the day, the In-Town shuttle could run from the Lionshead Mall (on the southwest corner of the Lionshead Parking Structure) to Golden Peak. In addition, a separate "extension" shuttle service between Ford Park and Golden Peak could be provided given 800-plus parking spaces that may be provided at Ford Park. An "extension" service route could also be provided at the west end connecting West Lionshead (Ever Vail) to the Lionshead Mall. In the evening, both of these "extension" services could be discontinued, and the routing of the In-Town shuttle could be extended from West Lionshead to Ford Park. Golden Peak could be served via the golf course route in the evening. Without the Simba Run underpass, transit service within Vail will continue to be similar as it exists today; there is limited routing flexibility in serving future demands. A line-haul system is not possible without omitting at least one of the major activity centers and adding travel time by forcing buses to pass through interchanges. The Lionshead Transportation Center would be more effective with the Simba Run underpass as the Center would be better suited to serve West Vail, both sides of I-70. The better suited that the Lionshead Transportation Center can be, the more relief it can provide to the Village Transportation Center. A Simba Run feasibility study should be pursued to better understand the pros and cons of this improvement but one advantage includes the synergy it helps build with a new Transportation Center at Lionshead. The Town may also want to explore the possibility of using different sized buses. Some routes clearly experience major spikes in demand that might be better served with higher-capacity buses. Increased frequency could also be a consideration, but too many buses along a particular route eventually results in dimensioning returns and becomes a waste of resources. With an additional Transportation Center at Lionshead and an additional means of crossing I-70 (Simba Run Underpass), there are numerous options for the Town. As is the case today, routing will be dynamic and adjustments will need to be made every season in response to changing conditions within the Town. The Eagle County bus system (ECO) would also make use of the Lionshead Transportation Center. It is anticipated that demand served by ECO will grow in the future given the strong potential for growth Down Valley within Eagle County. Potential routing of this service within Vail could also be enhanced with a Simba Run underpass. H. Parking Currently, the town-owned Village Structure and the Lionshead Structure provide 2500 total spaces of public parking. Ford Park offers parking for an additional 250 vehicles during ski season supplemented with transit service to the Village; this parking is restricted to permitted vehicles only. As previously mentioned, the Town has set a goal to establish 400 additional public parking spaces for the near-term planning horizon and a total of 1000 additional public parking spaces for the long-term. These objectives are based on winter season parking data � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & ULLE�°IC� Page41 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update relative to the frequency of using the Frontage Road to serve overflow parking demands, and the additional parking is intended to reduce how often the Town's supply is exceeded. Frontage Road parking statistics are collected nearly every time the Frontage Road is pressed into service. The Town has established an objective to accommodate the 90t" percentile design day, which is approximately equal to the 15th busiest day during winter ski season; the 400 and 1000 space increase would meet this goal for the short-term and long-term time-frames respectively. Location options to place the increased parking supply include the following: ► West Lionshead (Ever Vail) as part of that area's redevelopment. Between 300 and 400 additional ublic parking spaces are being considered as part of the West Lionshead plan (beyond parking to be dedicated to development uses). In association with this and the new lift planned for West Lionshead is the potential for a roundabout intersection onto the Frontage Road and transit facilities. ► Lionshead Structure as part of its possible redevelopment. The redevelopment of the Lionshead Structure could incorporate an additional 200 to 300 public spaces for public use (beyond the parking needed to support the proposed uses). ► Ford Park - Preliminary study conducted by the Town has yielded the possibility of adding 300 to 650 spaces at Ford Park, likely below the playing fields. The potential of constructing a roundabout at Ford Park would support the additional of parking in this area relative to access onto the Frontage Road, and transit service providing connectivity to the Village would be necessary to support this concept. Besides serving parking demands during ski season, the provision of parking at Ford Park would support event activity during the summer. The future location of the parking supply within the Main Vail area (Lionshead and Vail Village) may remain a bit out of alignment with the parking demand generators. If the development and redevelopment of Vail comes to fruition as described in this report, there will be a bit of a mismatch with respect to the placement of the parking versus the demand for the parking. The following illustrates the imbalance: ► Vail Village Area • 1300 spaces at Structure, 300 at Ford Park, total supply will be 1600 spaces • 350,000 square feet of commercial uses need to be served • Approximately 49 percent of the lift capacity • Ski portals "center" on approximately 80 percent of the skiable terrain ► Lionshead Area • 1500 spaces at the Structure, 400 spaces at West Lionshead (ever Vail), total supply will be 1900 spaces • 350,000 square feet of commercial uses need to be served • Approximately 51 percent of the lift capacity � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I C� Page 42 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update • Ski portals "center" on approximately 20 percent of the skiable terrain As mentioned, the ski area is oriented easterly from the Main Vail interchange. The Vail Village parking structure is approximately located at a central point to the ski area on the mountain. The Lionshead parking structure is skewed to the west of the ski area, and the West Lionshead (Ever Vail) is skewed to the west even more-so. Because of their relative locations, skiers tend to fill the Village Structure before the Lionshead Structure. Additional parking provided in the Main Vail area would better serve the Town if it can be located to the east. However, the location of parking must also be balanced with site opportunities to provide it. Currently, the most promising opportunities to gain parking supply is via the Lionshead Parking Structure redevelopment, Ever Vail and Ford Park. Two of these three are located to the west, a bit aside from the skiable terrain. While the Town should look to capitalize on these opportunities, the Town should also pursue parking opportunities in the eastern area of Main Vail to better balance supply and demand locations. An improved balance translates into less travel within and between the Vail areas. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°�c� Page 43 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update VI. FRONTAGE ROAD ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN As the Town's Transportation Plan was being developed through this process, CDOT and the Town agreed to develop an Access Management Plan (AMP) for the North and the South Frontage Road. The AMP will serve as a planning tool for CDOT and for the Town in that it defines ailowable access from which proposed development can plan. Further, it serves as a tool to recognize proposed access points for developments being considered in the near term. The AMP is a document that CDOT and Town staff agree to in principal; it is not subject to a formal IGA and agency adoption. The AMP is shown in Appendix H and it recognizes the elements of the plan that have been described to this point. Many of the existing access points are recognized in the plan. Areas where notable changes exist include the following: ► A new access to serve the Vail Valley Medical Center is shown along the South Frontage Road approximately 900 feet west of Vail Road. Additional coordinating with the Medical Center may be needed as their plans continue to evolve. Potential access consolidation should be pursued. ► The redevelopment of the Lionshead Parking Structure will alter the access for this site. Specifically, a "front door" access is being proposed as well as a major access to the parking area at approximately the current location. One the major differences is that the parking access will include a grade-separated ramp for the westbound left turn in movement. A planned roundabout at the East Lionshead Circle intersection onto the South Frontage Road will also serve access needs for this redevelopment. ► The West Lionshead Redevelopment Plan, otherwise known as Ever Vail, entails relocating the South Frontage Road to adjacent to I-70 in the proximity to Forrest Road. This along with the development planned in that area will introduce five access points onto the Frontage Road (including the Forest Road roundabout), but it will eliminate 10 accesses serving current uses. ► West Vail commercial uses are potentially candidates for redevelopment at the future time. However, a master plan has not been finalized and there are numerous land owners in this area that still need to coordinate. However, the AMP is showing a major access (in the form of a roundabout) and additional right-in/right-out accesses. ► Timber Ridge is a planned affordable housing project located along the North Frontage Road approximately equidistant between Lions Ridge Loop and Buffehr Creek Road. Its potential access scheme includes � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°�c� Page 44 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update VII. RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION PLAN From the analysis shown the previous chapters, a Town Transportation Pian has been developed and is presented in this chapter. The Plan is comprised of several elements including: ► Roadway Improvements ► Parking ► Transit ► Travel Demand Management Considerations ► Access Management Plan ► Cost Estimates and Potential Funding Sources A. Roadway Improvements Figure 8 conceptually shows recommended roadway improvements needed to accommodate travel demands within the Main Vail area and Figure 9 conceptually presents improvements that would be planned for West Vail. The major components include the following: 1. The Simba Run Underpass This is a critical component to serve Vail's traffic needs in that it provides some relief to the Main Vail Interchange and a fair amount of relief to the West Vail interchange. Additional benefits realized from this improvement include the provision for an additional pedestrian crossing of I-70 and a dramatic increase in bus routing flexibility within Town. This underpass of I-70 will great improve mobility within Vail and it benefits all modes of travel. Traffic-wise, this improvement will provide moderate relief to the Main Vail interchange approximately improving operations by one-half a LOS (some approaches more than others). It's most significant traffic operations benefit is realized at the West Vail Interchange in which peak hour operations have the potential of improving by up to two Levels of Service. The grade-separation of I-70 will provide for crossing capability without relying on the interchanges where traffic concentrations occur due to I-70 access. This underpass is anticipated to reduce traffic by approximately five percent and 13 percent, respectively, at the Main Vail and West Vail interchanges. Further, the increased ease of crossing I-70 would reduce travel along the Frontage Roads by approximately_vehicle-miles per day during a peak day. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°�c� Page 45 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Figure S. Recommended Frontage Road Improvement Plan - Main Vail � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°�c� Page 46 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Figure 9. Recommended Frontage Road Improvement Plan -West Vail � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I C� Page 47 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Transit-wise, the Simba Run underpass would provide an excellent opportunity to enhance service and increase efficiency. The areas served by the West Vail routes are awkward given major origins and destinations along both sides of I-70. Buses, like all traffic, are forced to cross I-70 at the Main Vail and the West Vail interchanges, and the circular routing through town is cumbersome. The underpass would allow for a host of route revisions resulting in far fewer vehicle-miles of bus travel required for service. With major activity centers possible along the North Frontage Road west of the new underpass as well as along the South Frontage Road east of the new underpass, the potential exists to establish a "spine" or line-haul" service connecting all of these centers. Other routes within town would then "feed" into the line-haul service. Pedestrian-wise, the Simba Run underpass would provide a crucial link between the north and south sides of I-70. Pedestrian activity has been known to take place across I-70 at-grade near the Simba Run location. Pedestrians crossing the high-speed freeway is an extremely unsafe situation. Fencing barrier exists along both sides of I-70, but openings in the fences are often created (illegally) allowing pedestrian activity to cross the interstate. The Simba Run underpass would mitigate this issue. The one drawback of the Simba Run underpass is that it's expense. This is the most costly element in the Transportation Plan. However, it is also an improvement that provides a significant level of benefit to the Town's mobility for all modes of travel. As a next step, the Town should undertake a more detailed feasibility study to fully appreciate the impacts, costs, benefits, and potentially identify a means of funding. 2. Main Vail Interchange Roundabout Enhancements. The key enhancement at this interchange is to establish two continuous lanes from the east leg of the South Frontage Road to the I-70 west on-ramp. Signing, striping for two northbound lanes under I-70, and enlargement of the north roundabout are the primary elements to this improvement. These improvements would greatly alleviate poor Levels of Service (improving to LOS E from LOS F during snowy conditions) for the westbound approach along the south roundabout and the westbound off-ramp approach at the north roundabout. This improvement alone is not adequate to mitigate traffic impacts, but it serves as a piece of the ultimate transportation plan in attempt to achieve acceptable conditions at this interchange. 3. West Vail Interchange Roundabout Enhancements These improvements include establishing two northbound lanes under I-70 and entering the north roundabout. Also, a desirable improvement addition to this includes adding a second southbound entry lane along Chamonix Road subject to acquiring right-of-way. These improvements would help alleviate poor Levels of Service (improving to LOS E from LOS F during snowy conditions) for the westbound North Frontage Road approach along the south roundabout and the westbound off-ramp approach at the north roundabout as well as the southbound Chamonix approach into the north roundabout. These improvements alone are not adequate to mitigate traffic impacts given future traffic demands, but they serve as a piece of the ultimate transportation plan in attempt to achieve acceptable conditions. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I C� Page 48 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update 4. Other Frontage Road Roundabouts Roundabouts should be constructed at strategic cross-street locations where volumes are relatively high and poor minor-street left-turn movements level of service are projected (if left under stop-sign control). The roundabouts alleviate the poor left-turn operations. Locations include: ► Ford Park (in association with parking) ► Lionshead Parking Structure redevelopment ► West Lionshead redevelopment (Ever Vail) ► Simba Run Underpass (both intersections, one onto the North Frontage Road and one onto the South Frontage Road) ► West Vail commercial redevelopment 5. Roadway Widening Roadway widening is also needed at selected locations to accommodate projected volumes and/or improve safety. Locations include: ► Vail Valley Drive to Ford Park - This widening is in conjunction with the three-quarter movement restriction at South Frontage Road/Vail Valley Drive and the roundabout at Ford Park. ► Municipal Center to West Lionshead —This widening is consistent with current plans by the Town and would better tie Lionshead activity areas with the Main Vail interchange. ► Turn-lane additions at North Frontage Road/Buffehr Creek Road, North Frontage Road/ Lionsridge Loop, and North Frontage Road/Red Sandstone Road. Turn lane additions may also be appropriate at development accesses pending the development's precise nature. Timber Ridge may be one example. Also, the need for a left turn lane at the Red Sandstone Elementary School. Given the improvements presented as part of this plan, intersection levels of service should be at acceptable levels. Figure 10 shows the projected PM peak hour traffic given the recommended plan and Figure 11 shows the corresponding LOS results. B. Travel Demand Management Measures should also be pursued to reduce spikes in traffic demands, especially for the Main Vail Interchange. Considerations include: ► Encouragement of drivers to use the East Vail interchange, through dynamic signing, when the Main Vail interchange is operating at its capacity. ► Look to meter outbound traffic from the Parking Structures. This occurs some today in the form of toll booths with drivers needing to stop and pay upon exit. Assuming this continues, the outbound metering will continue as well. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°�c� Page 49 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Figure 10. Year 2025 Peak Hour Traffic Projection with Recommended Plan � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I C� Page 50 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Figure 11. Year 2025 Peak Hour Levels of Service with Recommended Plan � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & ULLE�°�c� Page51 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update ► Ski passes can also be used to help control demand on peak days. The Town should work closely with Vail Resorts on this so as to not encourage inexpensive skiing at times when high travel demands are anticipated anyway. ► Provision of real-time information to skiers about conditions along I-70 and/or within town (such as how long of a wait to exit the parking structure) could also help manage traffic demand during the afternoon. Again, the Town and Vail Resorts should coordinate to determine an efficient and effective means to inform skiers at the end of the day as to current conditions. If drivers are forewarned about congested conditions, they may tend to naturally "spread ouY' over time and be less concentrated at peak times. ► Explore parking management options in which potential fee incentives are applied for drivers who avoid entering and leaving during peak hours. C. Transit With Growth occurring in West Vail, Timber Ridge, West Lionshead, Lionshead Village, Vail Village, and potentially Ford Park (in the form of parking supply), establishing a line-haul transit system that directly connects these major activity centers with frequent service would be beneficial. The In-Town Route would essentially remain as is with the potential for some adjustment at the east end and the west end with variations pending time of day. Other outlying routes would be geared toward moving people to the primary line-haul route. A key consideration for this line-haul concept to function is the Simba Run underpass. This construction improvement will greatly enhance the line-haul concept by routing buses past each of the key activity centers without the need for back-tracking. This improvement also builds synergy with the proposed Lionshead Transportation Center. This proposed facility, possibly located within the Lionshead Parking Structure Redevelopment, is best situated to serve Lionshead and West Vail with this underpass. As the ability of the Lionshead Transportation Center is increased to serve as a transit hub for the west half of Vail, more relief can be provided to the heavily-used Village Transportation Center. Other routing options can be developed, but the provision of the Simba Run underpass provides routing flexibility within town and could result in service efficiencies. Figure 12 shows a potential bus routing system map of Vail. As previously suggested, the plan would take advantage of the new Simba Run underpass of I-70. A brief description of each potential route follows: ► In-Town Shuttle—This route would be similar to the current routing, but one key, and time saving, change would include eliminating the western-most leg to West Lionshead Circle. This would eliminate the need to turn onto the Frontage Road; the In-town shuttle would be entirely off of the Frontage Road during peak times. West Lionshead Circle could be served by an exclusive shuttle extension route until a roundabout at East Lionshead Circle onto the South Frontage Road is completed. Time-of-day routing adjustments could be made such that the In-town shuttle's eastern terminus is Ford Park (given additional parking that would be provided there) once ski activity is completed for the day and Golden Peak is no longer a high-demand area. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I C� Page 52 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Figure 12. Proposed Vail Bus Routes � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°�c� Page 53 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update ► East Vail and Golf Course— Both of these routes would remain similar as they exist today. The Vail Transportation Center would continue to serve as the hub terminus for these routes. Additional overflow service should be considered for East Vail at peak times. ► Ford Park— This route is intended to transport users parked at Ford Park to the Vail Transportation Center. This route would remain as it exists today, but the frequency of service may be increased pending the construction of additional parking supply at this area. After peak hours, this route could be served by a re-routing of the In-Town shuttle. A variation could include a shuttle to Golden Peak. ► West Vail/Main Vail Frontage Road —This route would be the "Line Haul" previously referenced in this report. Buses along this route would simply travel directly between the Vail Transportation Center and the West Vail commercial area. Major stops along the route would include the planned transit center at the redeveloped Lionshead Parking Structure, West Lionshead, and Timber Ridge. The Simba Run underpass is a crucial improvement needed for this route to be efficient and make sense. ► West Vail South —This route would run along the South Frontage Road from the Vail Transportation Center west with stops at the redeveloped Lionshead Parking Structure and West Lionshead. This route could serve West Lionshead. Further west, this route would stay on the south side of I-70 also serving Cascade Village, West Gore Creek Drive, and Intermountain. To provide transit service across I-70, this route would cross at the West Vail interchange and terminate at the West Vail commercial area before turning around and back-tracking to the Vail Transportation Center (or the Lionshead Transportation Center) via the South Frontage Road. ► West Vail North —This route would parallel the West Vail South route in that it would utilize the north Frontage Road. However, it would also utilize the South Frontage for a portion of its travel. This too would stop at the redeveloped Lionshead Parking structure, West Lionshead, Timber Ridge, and the West Vail commercial area. However, it would also serve the Lionsridge area and the residential areas in West Vail on the north side of I-70. This route also requires the Simba Run underpass to efficient�y connect with the major stop areas. ► Sandstone—This route would be remain as it exists today which includes service between the Vail Transportation Center and the Red Sandstone Road area. The ECO service to Vail would also be able to take advantage of the Simba Run underpass. Potentially, ECO routes could access Town via the West Vail interchange with programmed stops at the West Vail commercial area, Timber Ridge, West Lionshead, the redeveloped Lionshead Structure, and the Vail Transportation Center. This potential ECO routing would mimic the "line haul" concept previously described. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°�c� Page 54 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update D. Parking The Town should look to expand the public parking supply within Main Vail to reduce the frequency of Frontage Road use for overflow parking. Based on accommodating a gptn percentile and based on Frontage Road parking data over the past few ski seasons, 400 new spaces should be developed over the short term. Over the long term, 1000 additional spaces (600 more) should be developed in Main Vail. To the extent possible, more new public spaces should be located in the eastern sections of the Main Vail area. Potential locations include: ► West Lionshead (up to 400 additional spaces) ► Lionshead Parking Structure (as part of its redevelopment; possible net gain of 300 spaces) ► Ford Park (at least 300 additional spaces) The addition of these parking areas, along with additional commercial and skier access would "spread out" Vail's base area to approximately 1.6 miles of frontage. Because of the increased density, activity, and distance, the Town's transportation system within and to the Main Vail area clearly needs to be enhanced to support these activities through the combination of roadway improvements and transit service enhancements. E. Pedestrians and Trails Currently, the Town maintains a system of trails to accommodate pedestrian and bicycle activity within and through town. Trails are provided along Gore Creek through town and bicycle lanes are provided along the Frontage Roads. The Town maintains a goal to be bicycle and pedestrian friendly in the spirit of maintaining a multi-modal transportation system. The Simba Run underpass will provide a badly needed pedestrian connection between areas north and south of I-70. In particular, the connection will serve pedestrian activity between the Timber Ridge employee housing development and the ski area. The Town's Public Works Department is in the process of developing a Recreational Master Plan. (More to come) � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°�c� Page 55 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update VIII. IMPROVEMENT TRIP THRESHOLDS The preceding analysis and resulting Transportation Plan is based on future development throughout Town. The total PM peak hour trip generation of all new development is estimated to be 2000 trips. The recommended plan was based on the premise of achieving acceptable Levels of Service at the critical locations within town. This chapter of the report is intended to provide a sense as to the effectiveness of each improvement toward alleviating a projected poor Level of Service measured against an equivalent trip generation associated with new development. Three critical operational traffic components are considered here including: ► Main Vail interchange, North roundabout, WB I-70 Off-ramp approach ► Main Vail interchange, South roundabout, WB Frontage Road approach ► West Vail interchange, North roundabout, WB Frontage Road approach The effectiveness is measured in terms of the equivalent offset in total PM peak hour trip generation. In other words, each improvement can offset a certain amount of traffic impact reduction from new development measured in total trip generation. Estimates of the effectiveness were based on a series of sensitivity LOS analyses given varying degrees of trip generation from the new developments (i.e. portions of the 2000 new trips estimated). Table 10 shows the effectiveness of each improvement, and the bottom row of the table shows the needed trip offset to achieve a LOS D under snowy conditions. The structure of Table 10 is a menu allowing one to pick and chose measures, summing the effectiveness offset values to achieve the figures in the bottom row. All values are given in terms of ranges as these are gross estimates. It should also be noted that actual values will vary depending on where within town development takes place. In addition, values may decrease as more improvements are considered. The north roundabout at the Main Vail interchange is a component requiring the greatest amount of trip "offset" to achieve a LOS D. Only 200 to 300 total PM peak hour trips from new development could occur before LOS E is reached, so 1700 to 1800 new PM peak hour trips need to be offset by improvements (given that all new development will generate 2,000 PM peak hour trips). From Table 10, improving the roundabout and establishing two northbound lanes under I-70 at this interchange would be the single most effective measure for the WB I-70 off-ramp approach. But this alone would not offset enough impact to achieve LOS D; other measures would also be required such as the Simba Run underpass and/or a combination of other items listed. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°�c� Page 56 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Table 10. Mitigation Measure Offset; Total New Trips Equivalent Effective PM Peak Hour Trip Generation Offset Main Vail Interchange West Vail Potential Measure Interchan e North Roundabout South Roundabout North Roundabout WB I-70 Off-Ramp WB Frontage Road WB Frontage Road Approach Approach Approach 1. Expand Main Vail North 1400-1500 0 0 Roundabout 2. Add NB Lane Under I-70 (Incorporated in 500-600 300-400 Measure 1 3. Simba Run Underpass 500-600 200-300 1200-1300 4. Encourage Use of East Vail 300-400 100-200 0 Interchan e 5. Parking Management 300-500 250-350 100-200 Measures 6. Express Bus Service �2� 200-250 100-150 200-300 7. Extend Ski Hours 100-150 50-100 <50 8. Meter Outbound Parking 150-200 150-200 100-150 Structure Traffic Target—Number of Trips from New Development to Offset to 1700-1800 600-700 1000-1100 Maintain LOS D During Snowy Conditions �3� '� Values in columns represent the effectiveness of the improvement in terms of total generated PM peak hour trips from new development. Values will vary for each of the three critical traffic approaches listed below depending on the specific location of a new development proposal and based on how many of the improvements are packaged together(the effectiveness of each improvement will lessen as the number of ineasures/improvements to be implemented increase). �2� Measure requires Simba Run underpass for best results. �3� Values in this row show the objective amount of PM peak hour trips that need to be offset by the improvements above or through reducing the level of planned development. Total PM peak hour trips from new development are estimated to be 2000 when built out. At the Main Vail South Roundabout, establishing the second northbound lane under I-70 (and installing appropriate striping and signing to take full advantage this improvement) would be the most effective offsetting measure, but again at least one other measure would also be needed. At West Vail, the Simba Run underpass is really the only measure that would produce enough effectiveness to alleviate a LOS E. Based on operations at the West Vail north roundabout, Table 10 indicates that the Simba Run underpass should be in place by the time that one-half of the proposed development is completed (bottom row shows the need to offset 1,000 to 1,100 trips out of the 2,000 total peak hour trips projected). � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I C� Page 57 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update As an example in applying Table 10, suppose a development/redevelopment proposal is estimated to generate 400 PM peak hour trips. If mitigation measures were to be applied so as to offset the impact of these trips on the interchange roundabouts listed in the table, then one would select the appropriate mitigation measures such that the offset values sum to 400. Table 10 would suggest that the impact of these 400 total trips could be offset at the Main Vail North roundabout via encouraging other traffic to use the East Vail interchange (Number 4, 300- 400 trip offset effectiveness). However, this measure would only offset about one-half the impact at the South Roundabout intersection, so one may also choose to provide Express Bus Service (Number 6, 100-150 trip equivalent) and extend ski hours (Number 7, 50-100 trip offset equivalent) to fully mitigate the traffic impact of the development at the south roundabout. With respect to these three offsetting measures for the West Vail roundabout, Numbers 3, 6, and 8 would fall just short of offsetting the impact of a 400-trip development. One other measure would be required, perhaps Parking Management Measures (Number 5, 100-200 trip offset). Another application of the table is to use it in assessing a particular improvement, say the Simba Run Underpass. If the Town is able to advance this improvement, then enough trip offset would be in place to offset the impacts of 1200 to 1300 trips per hour from new development at the West Vail Roundabout. However, this improvement would "buy" less impact offset at the Main Vail roundabouts. The table is intended to be guide. Clearly, the location of the development will have an effect on the relative impact to the roundabouts listed, so some engineering judgment is required in the table's application. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I C� Page 58 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update IX. IMPROVEMENT COST ESTIMATES Planning level construction cost estimates have been developed for the Frontage Road improvements. These have been grouped into Frontage Road sections and include the improvement recommendations presented here as well as other maintenance activities such as overlays. Figures 13 and 14 show the improvements, their cost, potential funding sources and a rough estimate as to the appropriate timing. These figures were developed by Vail's Public Works staff. The total cost for the program improvements is approximately $63 million. The Simba Run underpass would be the single most costly improvement. However, this improvement would deliver significant benefit to the Town as this report identifies. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°�c� Page 59 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Figure 13. West Vail Frontage Road Improvements � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I C� Page 60 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Figure 14. Main Vail Frontage Road Improvements � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & ULLE�°�c� Page61 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update X. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS A. Priorities Improvements in this plan may require time to implement as funding becomes available. Roadway construction including the underpass will take time to fund. As such, the lower cost travel demand management measures should be pursued first. These include parking pricing policies and encouragement to use the East Vail Interchange. These should be the simplest measures to implement and "test" for effectiveness. Relative to improvement priorities, the Simba Run underpass provides a wide variety of benefits to Vail's Transportation system. Traffic-wise, this improvement relieves both interchanges, provides an option to cross I-70, provides for a pedestrian crossing of I-70, provides greater flexibility in routing Town buses, and allows for the planned Lionshead Transportation Center to better serve the community and relieve the heavily-used Village Transportation Center. Also, securing funding, obtaining necessary approvals, design, and eventual construction will take time. As such, the Town should consider moving ahead with the approval and clearance processes for the Simba Run underpass. This may best be done by first conducting a more detailed Simba Run Underpass Feasibility Study to better understand and quantify all of the benefits, disadvantages, and costs associated with this project B. Other Planning Efforts Improvements or actions that impact any portion of I-70 or the right-of-way thereof may be subject to State and Federal approval procedures. Modifications to the interchanges are subject to CDOT's Policy Directive 1601 which may require a feasibility study. Environmental clearance will also likely be required for interchange modifications as defined in CDOT's Policy Directive 1601 and in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Transportation Improvements that impact Ford Park may also be subject to 4F regulations and procedures. Longer term, the ideas have been raised to perhaps dramatically change I-70 through Town. The thought is based on the potential of utilizing the space that I-70 currently occupies for development as the value of this property may more than offset the costs of reconfiguring I-70. Two ideas have been raised. One includes "cut and cover" in which I-70 would be depressed in its current alignment and structural decking would be placed atop of I-70. The other idea includes the potential of re-routing I-70 under Vail Mountain south of town. Far more study is needed to determine if either of these is feasible, but in the event that one of these options is approved and funding is identified, the Town's transportation plan should be updated. Under either one of these scenarios, I-70 would no longer be the barrier that it is currently, allowing a host of options transportation-wise. In addition, an assessment should be made to determine if and what type of east-west roadway would be needed through the Town. Also, if either of these ideas becomes eminent, any improvement recommended in this plan should be reviewed carefully before implementation to ensure it would still be warranted. � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°I C� Page 62 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update C. I-70 PEIS CDOT has issued a draft of the I-70 PEIS document for public review. This effort considers an extended length of I-70 from C-470 to Glenwood Springs including through the Town of Vail. Results of the effort identify the potential for rail service from Denver to the Vail Transportation Center. In addition,.... � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°�c� Page 63 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update APPENDIX A TRAFFIC COUNTS � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT �ti U L L E 1�'1�� Appendix A Vail Transportation Master Plan Update APPENDIX B EXISTING LOS CALCULATIONS � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°�c� Appendix B Vail Transportation Master Plan Update APPENDIX C DETAILED TRAVEL TIME DATA � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°�c� Appendix C Vail Transportation Master Plan Update APPENDIX D FRONTAGE ROAD COLLISION DIAGRAMS � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°�c� Appendix D Vail Transportation Master Plan Update APPENDIX E DEVELOPMENT AND TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°�c� Appendix E Vail Transportation Master Plan Update APPENDIX F SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD CROSS-SECTION IN LIONSHEAD � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°�c� Appendix F Vail Transportation Master Plan Update APPENDIX G CONCEPTUAL LAYOUTS OF IMPROVEMENTS PLAN � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°�c� Appendix G Vail Transportation Master Plan Update APPENDIX H IMPROVEMENT COST ESTIMATES � rr�_sr�:1:c; �� HC)LT & U L L E�°�c� Appendix H