In accordance with the Public Involvement Plan, the 2050 LRTP was made available for public comment from January 10, 2025, through February 9, 2025. The full document, to include the Regional Transit Plan and Specialized Transportation Plan, was posted on the PPACG website. It was also available as a downloadable PDF. A comment form was available on the PPACG website.
To support the public comment period, PPACG held the follwing four open houses.
- Tuesday, Jan. 21, 2025 – 4:00-6:30 p.m. – Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments, 14 S. Chestnut St., Colorado Springs CO 80905
- Thursday, Jan. 23, 2025 – 9:30-11:30 a.m. – Monument Town Hall, 645 Beacon Lite Rd., Monument, CO 80132
- Tuesday, Jan. 28, 2025 – 1-3 p.m. – Fountain City Council Chambers, 116 Main St., Fountain, CO 80817
- Wednesday, Jan. 29, 2025 – 9-11 a.m. – Woodland Park City Council Chambers, 220 W. South Ave., Woodland Park, CO 80863
A virtual open house was also available on the PPACG website.
These open houses and the public comment period were announced via a news release and advertised via the local newspaper and social media. Notice was distributed to a wide variety of community members and organizations via distribution lists. PPACG also engaged our planning partners and committee members to disperse notice of the public comment period.
The following provides a summary of discussion at the open houses and provides a list of comments received via email and the online public comment form.
Open House Overview
The open houses featured a series of interactive stations arranged around the room. Members of the project team were available at each station to answer questions and discuss the information that was presented on the boards. In total, 32 attendees participated in open house events. Participants were encouraged to make formal comments via hard copy forms or via the online form.
The following were among the topics discussed at the open houses:
- Project types and locations
- Funding types and potential changes to future funding
- LRTP planning process and how projects were selected
- Interest in trails and bicycle/pedestrian projects and how to get involved in future planning efforts
- Accessibility of transit and transporation options
- Support for the Woodland Park Reliever Route Study
- Interest in how growth patterns may impact traffic, particularly in the Monument area
- Interest in how the population projections and employment projections were developed
- Interest in the potential implementation of a ride service similar to the Access-on-Demand program run by the Denver Regional Transportation District
- Interest in specialized transportation services and future strategies to meet demand, including rides that cross funding or jurisdictional boundaries
- Interest in current and future transit routes, frequency, and amenities
- Interest in improving east-west corridors for transportation
- Support for alternative transportation modes and protection for vulnerable road users
- Support for continued maintenance for existing roadways
Planning Partner Comments
During the public comemnt period, PPACG also received comments from planning partners related to the LRTP. These are documented below in addition to any changes made to the document for transparency.
- CDOT Headquarters provided clarification on performance measures that resulted in minor changes to the document for accuracy.
- CDOT Headquarters provided comments on passenger rail-related text that resulted in minor text changes for clarity.
- CDOT Region 2 provided comments on the implementation plan that resulted in minor changes for accuracy.
- Peterson Space Force Base provided comments resulting in changes to the acknowledgements section for accuracy.
Public Comments
The following formal comments were provided to PPACG. All names and ZIP codes were provided by the participant and were not verified.
Name: Robin Dailey
Zip Code: 80906
Would you like to comment positively or negatively on the projects?
N/A
Do you have any comments on the financial plan?
N/A
Are there any other general comments you would like to make?
Page 4-20 contains a short paragraph entitled Air Transportation. This section needs to include at least a paragraph on Urban Air Mobility (UAM) which is a rapidly developing mode of transportation for urban areas. UAM includes Electric Vertical Takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft that can take off and land at urban Vertiports. eVTOL commercial companies that are flying and near production include Joby, Archer, and Eve among others. Vertiports are being built or planned for several cities including Austin, Houston and NYC. My suggestion for Colorado Springs at this time is very simple and easy to accomplish. That suggestion is to allow and design-in open space on the top of the new downtown bus terminal for eVTOL take offs and landings. This mode of transportation at this urban location would be very efficient, convenient and green. If you would like discuss this more, please contact me. (Personal information redacted.) I am an Air Force Academy graduate, former Air Force pilot and hopefully soon to be owner of an Air One personal (not commercial)
Name: Wendy Crawford
Zip Code: 80918
Would you like to comment positively or negatively on the projects?
I would love to see the return of passenger rail service from COS to Denver and Pueblo.
Do you have any comments on the financial plan?
N/A
Are there any other general comments you would like to make?
N/A
Name: Karl Stang
Zip Code: 80829
Would you like to comment positively or negatively on the projects?
The near term project list did not include any mobility projects (IMO Park-N-Rides are not mobility). If we want to make any meaningful improvement on transit, pedestrian, or bicycle mobility utilization goals we MUST start prioritizing the freedom of mobility options for the residents of the Pikes Peak region.
Do you have any comments on the financial plan?
N/A
Are there any other general comments you would like to make?
The most glaring omission in the report is that there is no mention of the Front Range Passenger rail project and how it would tie into the Pikes Peak region. We cannot keep widening I-25. Houston and Los Angeles have already shown that that particular solution is a dead end. Additionally, the performance measurements seemed at odds with each other. There was mention of safety, but then there was still a large focus on Level-Of-Service and congestion. Safety needs to be non-negotiable and then LOS.
Name: Helene Gallaway
Zip Code: 80829
Would you like to comment positively or negatively on the projects?
Positively
Do you have any comments on the financial plan?
I’m concerned about a loss of federal funding due to the change in federal administration; is this being considered (alternative funding, tax rate adjustments, cessation of important projects)?
Are there any other general comments you would like to make?
I would like to see more emphasis in the following areas: protected bike lanes, signalized ped crossings that prioritize people (not cars), sidewalk requests where there are gaps along major roadways where people live/amenity zones (example of this is west at Centennial and Fillmore near Veteran’s Hospital where there is no sidewalk on south side), traffic calming in OCC/Colorado Ave westside, transit system with more frequent service/lower headways, installation of more bus shelters at stops (suggest green shelters), request for passenger light rail along Front Range, added protections/traffic calming in school zones. In summation, I would like to see more emphasis on safe, sustainable non-car alternatives.
Name: Harrison
Zip Code: 80903
Would you like to comment positively or negatively on the projects?
I’m happy that there seems to be a big focus on public transportation. I believe that we should focus on building a robust transit system in the older core of Colorado Springs. It’s hard to imagine any of the folks moving to Powers (or beyond!) are ever going to take a bus. I’d rather have a bus system that services 30% of the population perfectly than a bus system that services 70% of the population poorly.
Do you have any comments on the financial plan?
Just find the money for public transit please.
Are there any other general comments you would like to make?
Please build a passenger train to Denver and a streetcar to Manitou.
Name: Debi Levin-Stankevich
Zip Code: 80906
Would you like to comment positively or negatively on the projects?
No.
Do you have any comments on the financial plan?
No.
Are there any other general comments you would like to make?
Yes. I am the PPAAA Chair of the Regional Advisory Committee and would like to let you know that we survey all of the clients that use any of our services providers including transportation services. These surveys will be going soon and usually have comments on transportation services. Also next year in 2026 the Pikes Peak AAA will begin the process of writing our next 4 year plan. We have many, (the last 4 year plan included 30 community meeting) community meeting and older adults always have many comments and concerns about transportation. You may find it interesting to attend a meeting.
Name: Zuri Horowitz
Zip Code: 80904
Would you like to comment positively or negatively on the projects?
- “- Happy to see so much that Colorado Springs is doing to address multimodal, improving signalization, hopefully with pedestrians and bike riders in mind, improving trail connectivity including Sinton and Sandcreek trails
- Kudos on Colorado Springs implementing a Safe Streets 4 All grant – Five types of demonstration projects will be temporarily installed and before and after data will be evaluated to determine effectiveness. Demonstration projects include rubberized pinned down raised crosswalks, dynamic speed feedback signs, neighborhood pop-up traffic circles, speed activated flashing school zone signs, and projected bike lanes.
- We need bike lanes on Colorado Ave that connect OCC to downtown and Manitou Springs, not just way finding when it isn’t safe to ride.
- CDOT is planning to spend 137.5 million to add an extra lane on I25 for one mile between Cimarron and N Nevada exits, that’s a no for me
- Do not widen Platte between Chelton and Powers, it’s already an extremely deadly road and the population in Colorado isn’t growing at this time. We need more efficient transportation along Platte, not more lanes
- Do not widen Fillmore from Cascade to I25 – it needs a mode shift, eg more buses/bikes/walkability, not more lanes – it is busy twice a day for two hours. There are a bunch of small businesses that are already difficult to access, adding more lanes will hurt these local businesses
- Good job making the Platte and Academy intersection safer
- If military bases get more people they should focus on providing transit between bases and frequent destinations.
- Lots of CDOT projects were vague
- Happy El Paso County is working on ADA compliance, and is fixing trails including Crews Gulch, Eastonville & Latigo, & Fountain Creek, Fox Run, CO94, Jackson Creek, Sandcreek Regional Trails
- Wider/longer roads make it more difficult for emergency services to reach people, we need to focus on infill. We can barely keep our roads paved as is, widening/lengthening roads only makes that more impossible and doesn’t just cost us now but will cost us later.
- Happy to see the focus on intersection improvement, safety improvements, pedestrian and bike improvements, ADA improvements, would like more investment in transit
- Reminder to them we have to make sure that when we implement multimodal we aren’t just placing sidewalks/bike paths alongside a road we need to focus on how they safely, efficiently, and comfortably interact with vehicles”
Do you have any comments on the financial plan?
137.5 milllion is a lot of money for an HOV lane
Are there any other general comments you would like to make?
N/A
Name: Denee Child
Zip Code: 80132
Would you like to comment positively or negatively on the projects?
Getting around COS is frustrating and congested. Still need a east/west freeway to get to I-25. Once Powers is done, use Woodman and create a freeway with over passes to quickly get to Powers. Then Powers north should be easier to get to I-25. Other cities the size of COS have much better freeways to get easily around the city.Need to ease congestion that is happening on I-25 from Briargate to Cimarron esp. during major commute times because there is no secondary road that you can easily access to bypass the freeway. Create another freeway lane and not a HOV lane.Consider a light rail from southern end of COS to Denver. Move the General Palmer statue off of Nevada and put it in Acacia Park that is a crazy intersection with pedestrians, cyclists and cars and the massive statue in the way. Glad they still plan on creating overpasses south from Woodman along powers. That is a busy congested area and to help traffic keep moving, the over passes south to the airport are needed. The open house in Monument was informative for citizens. The maps they had on easels were good and the transportation members were welcoming and knowledgeable.
Do you have any comments on the financial plan?
Looked through it, but without major understanding of where money comes from and the budget, have to trust the people who disburse it.
Are there any other general comments you would like to make?
Connecting more of the bikes paths is a good goal. Having separate bike paths off the roads are more safe and get more use by individuals and families. Bike paths that people can easily access from their neighborhoods so that they use the bike paths more for recreation and transportation. Have bike paths where you don’t have to cross busy or major intersections is important. Going underneath the road or an overpass bike ramp is more desirable. Having safe bike paths which I know can be difficult and hard to enforce. South past America the Beautiful park is scary and the Midland trail through Old Colorado is bad. The well developed recreational bike path Summit County in Frisco has is amazing, long, well thought out and fun to ride and see so many families use. Random request to have school signs and flashing lights along Nevada and Weber where Palmer High School esp. when students are coming and leaving school.
Name: Steve Weiner
Zip Code: 80910
Would you like to comment positively or negatively on the projects?
I am very impressed with the overall plan. It is thorough, comprehensive and well written. The organization and presentation of multiple avenues of analysis creates a challenge for the authors and they have succeeded in effectively synthesizing the information for the reader. Bravo. Regarding specific projects, I am happy to see that the Southern Colorado Rail Park has been included in the analysis. The projects offers many benefits to the region and deserves recognition for its positive economic and environmental benefits.
Do you have any comments on the financial plan?
Preparing a valid financial plan for such a huge scope of work seems at the outset to be almost impossible, but the authors have done a nice job of organizing their analyses and documenting their assumptions in a cogent fashion. The plan seems to be a Goldilocks version…not too aggressive, not too conservative, but just about right. Good work.
Are there any other general comments you would like to make?
The staff deserves credit for successfully engaging the public and patiently collecting the massive database necessary to complete such a large study. The report is well organized, well written and thoroughly comprehensive. All in all a great effort. Congratulations for accomplishing this work on schedule.
Name: Craig Gooding
Zip Code: 80819
Would you like to comment positively or negatively on the projects?
N/A
Do you have any comments on the financial plan?
N/A
Are there any other general comments you would like to make?
Like all the active transportation projects, and the “on demand” transit plan.
Name: Melissa Marts
Zip Code: N/A
Would you like to comment positively or negatively on the projects?
N/A
Do you have any comments on the financial plan?
N/A
Are there any other general comments you would like to make?
From a safety perspective and bus stop access, explore getting crosswalks on four-lane roads where riders have to walk long distance to get to a crosswalk/stoplight and then have to walk back on the other side, so they end up crossing in the middle (i.e. Chelton).
Name: Scott Bartlett- The Independence Center
Zip Code: 80903
Would you like to comment positively or negatively on the projects?
N/A
Do you have any comments on the financial plan?
N/A
Are there any other general comments you would like to make?
The 145,800 rides provided to older adults and people with disabilities through specialized transportation creates access to our community that many people would not enjoy if these rides were not provided. However, there remains approximately 7,000 rides denied that will interfere with people’s ability to live and work in the in their communities. Transportation planning should build capacity and reduce the number of denied rides so that people with disabilities can fully participate as citizens of the city.
Name: Carlos Perez
Zip Code: 80920
Would you like to comment positively or negatively on the projects?
Overall positive feedback on the projects. I am pleased that active transportation is part of the long term plan.
Do you have any comments on the financial plan?
No comments on the financial plan.
Are there any other general comments you would like to make?
I have three general comments. The first is the relationship between household expenses and transportation. After housing (34%), transportation is the second highest expense for Colorado residents (17%). This point needs to be highlighted as our future transportation choices will impact household budgets and projects rarely take this into consideration. Thus, the plan needs to show how it delivers value to residents rather than just solving traffic congestion. The second comment is concerning VMT. This is measured as a flat number which doesn’t provide a complete picture. Instead, the performance dashboard should include VMT per capita. This way as population increases we can see if we are slowing the increasing rate of VMT. Third, resist calls to scrub trigger words like “equity”, “greenhouse gas emissions,” and “disproportionately impacted communities” from the plan. Just because some people are willfully ignorant and unable to make rational plans based on facts and evidence, doesn’t mean the PPACG can’t either.
Name: Ginger Stringer
Zip Code: 80925
Would you like to comment positively or negatively on the projects?
14,000 individuals with disabilities are living in El Paso, Park and Teller counties. Not having safe and appropriate transportation for individual needs prohibits them from living independently. Denver offers uber rides from trained drivers for those that cannot access a bus or “typical” Uber services. Why can this not be an available option?
Do you have any comments on the financial plan?
Funding is “always” the issue/excuse.
Are there any other general comments you would like to make?
We are ALL vulnerable to disability-one car wreck, one disease, one incident and aging. Safety is a priority for those with disability. We must take care of those that cannot take care of themselves. This cannot be overlooked or dismissed.