LSC TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. 516 North Tejon Street Colorado Springs, CO 80903 (719) 633-2868 FAX (719) 633-5430 E-mail: lsc@lsccs.com May 15, 2009 Mr. Davis Farrar Western Slope Consulting, LLC 0165 Basalt Mountain Drive Carbondale, Colorado 81623 Dear Mr. Farrar: RE: New Castle Comprehensive Plan Technical Memorandum LSC #075630 In response to your request, LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. has prepared this technical memorandum discussing the transportation element of the New Castle, Colorado Comprehensive Plan. MEMORANDUM CONTENTS The memorandum identifies major existing transportation limitations in the planning area. It also discusses areas the town could focus on in the future to assure a good transportation system, including improved traffic control, improved traffic circulation, improved or new roadway corridors, interchange improvements, additional interchange consideration, and accommodating transit, bicycles, pedestrians, etc. Details and specifics such as traffic counts and capacity analysis were not included in the scope of work. EXISTING TRANSPORTATION LIMITATIONS These areas are shown graphically in Figure 1. Interstate 70 Exit 105 The existing land use in the Town of New Castle is primarily residential with a large number of residents leaving the town limits each weekday for employment. This results in relatively heavy morning and afternoon peak-hour traffic volumes at the exit 105 interchange on Interstate 70 (I-70). The interchange ramps are controlled with stop-signs. The existing queuing/stacking and vehicle delay are expected to grow along with the community. This will likely result in a continued degradation of the interchange traffic operations. During the existing afternoon peak hour, the westbound offramp stop-sign control frequently results in significant backup/queues on the exit ramp.
Mr. Davis Farrar Page 2 May 15, 2009 New Castle Comprehensive Plan Technical Memorandum Intersection of US Highway 6/Bruce Road/Castle Valley Boulevard The existing intersection is controlled with all-way stop signs and has relatively short auxiliary lanes for many of the turning movements. This intersection acts as a bottleneck for traffic entering/leaving New Castle as it is the only local access to and from the exit 105 interchange on I-70. Queuing/ stacking from the all-way stop signs results in occasional blockage of nearby driveways and intersections. The frequency of this blockage will increase as the community continues to grow. The September 2007 Castle Valley Ranch Traffic Impact Analysis by LSC estimated that the northbound approach of this intersection was operating at level of service (LOS) E with an average delay per vehicle of about 45 seconds during the afternoon peak hour in 2006. With continued growth in New Castle, it is assumed that this movement has or will soon degrade to LOS F. The transition from LOS E to F is an average delay per vehicle of 50 seconds. 7 th Street/North Midland Avenue Corridor There are two existing street connections between the north and south sides of New Castle. They are the 7 th Street/North Midland Avenue corridor on the west side of town and Castle Valley Boulevard on the east side of town. The western corridor is a narrow, curvy, two-lane roadway with little opportunity for widening without significant land use impacts. US Highway 6 (Main Street) Downtown Corridor The existing configuration of Main Street through the downtown area is two through lanes in each direction with few auxiliary turn lanes. CDOT data suggests the average daily traffic in this urban area was as high as 7,300 vehicles in 2007. The inside or center through lane in each direction is frequently blocked by vehicles waiting to turn left from Main Street. This causes unnecessary delay and increases the likelihood of rear-end collisions. RECOMMENDED FUTURE TRANSPORTATION OBJECTIVES Access to Interstate 70 Future improvements to the existing exit 105 interchange will likely be needed as New Castle continues to grow. Improvements could include auxiliary turn lanes and traffic signal or roundabout control at the on/off ramp intersections with Bruce Road (CR 240) and widening of Bruce Road to include auxiliary turn lanes. This might require widening the Bruce Road bridges over I-70 and over the Colorado River. The addition of single-lane roundabouts at the on- and off-ramp intersections of I-70 with Bruce Road would likely extend the life of the existing bridge because turn lanes would not be necessary approaching the roundabouts as shown in Figure 2. Coordination should be maintained with the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) in these efforts.
Mr. Davis Farrar Page 3 May 15, 2009 New Castle Comprehensive Plan Technical Memorandum It is likely the need for future interchanges will be driven by future land use decisions. Coordination efforts with CDOT should include long-range planning discussions of possible interchange locations east and west of exit 105 in the event additional access becomes desirable. Intersection of US Highway/Bruce Road/Castle Valley Boulevard The September 2007 report recommended future signalization or two-lane roundabout control to provide acceptable operations. Also recommended was the widening of Castle Valley Boulevard to four lanes from I-70 to Blackhawk Drive. It was stated in the TIA that these recommended improvements are largely to mitigate overall growth in the New Castle area and not from one specific development or area. These recommendations are shown graphically in Figure 2. 7 th Street/North Midland Avenue Corridor As New Castle and the unincorporated portion of Garfield County along Buford Road (County Road 245) continue to grow, it will be important to identify acceptable long-term options for north/south travel alternatives on the west side of town. This will be a challenging task due to the existing land uses and topography in the area. Figure 3 shows two alternative long-term alignments that could be considered. It is likely the west connection to US Highway (US) 6 will require either traffic signal or roundabout control in the future. A significant amount of future traffic impact along the west side of New Castle could result from growth to the north in unincorporated Garfield County. The Town of New Castle should coordinate with Garfield County to ensure that any significant development in Garfield County acceptably documents the traffic impacts and makes recommendations for mitigation. This could involve helping to develop an alignment similar to those shown on Figure 3. US Highway 6 (Main Street) Downtown Corridor It would be appropriate to consider converting the existing four-lane cross section to a more urbanfriendly section. It may be appropriate to provide a three-lane cross section with adjacent parking and/or bike lanes. The three-lane section would include one through lane in each direction and a center, two-way, left-turn lane (TWLTL). This should improve safety considering the number of driveways/public intersections in the area. Where appropriate, the TWLTL could be striped as an unloading area for trucks serving area businesses. This may be appropriate if enough businesses in the area cannot accommodate large vehicles on site. East/West Connectivity It is important as the Town of New Castle expands to the east that an east/west Collector roadway connection be provided between the Lakota Golf Course area and Bruce Road (CR 240) and possibly US 6. This was shown conceptually in the town s three-mile plan. Recent development has resulted
Mr. Davis Farrar Page 4 May 15, 2009 New Castle Comprehensive Plan Technical Memorandum in a need to revisit the original connections of the three-mile plan. A conceptual layout is shown graphically in Figure 4. Expanded Transit Service Currently, the Roaring Fork Transit Authority (RFTA) provides bus service to New Castle at I-70 but provides no local service to area residents. It may be appropriate to consider a local circulator route to serve local land uses and connect with existing RFTA service. This concept is shown in Figure 5. Impact Fee Consideration It would be appropriate to consider developing an impact fee program to help fund many of the future transportation improvements suggested above. There are several ways impact fees could be handled. A few examples include: Assessment on all existing and future properties Fee based on average daily one-way trip ends generated by a proposed development Fee based on peak-hour one-way trips ends generated by a proposed development Fee based on density of development, such as per dwelling unit or per 1,000 square feet of commercial space. Some communities have chosen to use this method and waive the first 500 or 1,000 square feet of commercial space as a break to small businesses. The consideration of a transportation fee should be channeled through the public involvement process to clearly define the intent of the proposed fee and to determine what collection method is in the best interest of the community. DISCUSSION OF IMPROVEMENT TIMELINE Prioritizing the recommended roadway improvements is one of the first and most important tasks the Town of New Castle should consider. Short-Term Improvements Based on the above analysis, it appears the most critical roadway improvements will be the westbound ramp at the exit 105 interchange on I-70 and the US 6/Bruce Road/Castle Valley Boulevard intersection. Implementing a single-lane roundabout at the westbound off-ramp at the exit 105 interchange on I-70 could significantly extend the functional life of the existing two-lane bridge at the interchange since no turn lanes would be required. Implementing a two-lane roundabout at the US 6/Bruce Road/Castle Valley Boulevard intersection would eliminate the need for additional turn lanes. It would also allow the nearby driveways more
Mr. Davis Farrar Page 5 May 15, 2009 New Castle Comprehensive Plan Technical Memorandum functionality than traffic signal control, once the traffic volumes and stacking/queuing become heavy enough to restrict these driveways to right-in/right-out or three-quarter movements (with no left-turn movements from the driveways). Intermediate-Term Improvements Improving the US 6 corridor would likely encourage residents to patronize downtown businesses by providing a safer cross section for the left-turning vehicles and by improving parking and nonmotorized travel. The future widening of Castle Valley Boulevard to four lanes south of Blackhawk Drive will be driven by overall growth on the north side of the Town of New Castle. Improvements Primarily Driven by Future Development South of I-70 The need for improving the eastbound ramp at the exit 105 interchange on I-70 will likely be driven by growth on the south side of I-70, because traffic from this area would conflict with the heavy traffic flow in/out of the Town of New Castle portion north of I-70. It would be appropriate for proposed developments in this area to be required to show when this roadway improvement may become necessary through a traffic impact analysis (TIA). Long-Term Improvements It is likely the existing north/south connection with US 6 on the west side of the Town of New Castle will require either traffic signal or roundabout control in the future. A significant amount of future traffic impact along the west side of New Castle could result from growth to the north in unincorporated Garfield County. The Town of New Castle should coordinate with Garfield County to ensure that any significant development in Garfield County documents the traffic impacts and makes recommendations for mitigation. This could involve helping to develop a long-term alignment similar to those shown on Figure 3. It is likely the need for future I-70 interchanges will be driven by future land use decisions. Coordination efforts with CDOT should include long-range planning discussions of possible interchange locations east and west of exit 105 in the event additional access becomes desirable. SUMMARY There are limiting transportation conditions in the Town of New Castle area which, over time, will degrade intersection operations, increase vehicle delay, and reduce overall safety. It is recommended that issues be addressed by establishing clear transportation objectives as identified in this analysis. * * * * *