HomeMy WebLinkAboutbocc.res.009.1982 :.�y"`'i-' ,
.r�ri:
.:Ftr�'>;r'Tj� ,
�l � a.
f.titiVJ'� . S . .. . ... .,.,.. ...: .. �t, � �,
. � �e ��� !�"��.a;�,, (� �[' t�,,,.,.Y�.�,i.� �74ar�?'Yj�$S���f1�T;�*`�h� �tf'-jcr+q.,^t'ypet 's�rpv,�tny�a, y't�it�Atyyq'�i,yr� 'J o :
,i..c.," '__i�it'GF�Y���Yrltt.l�.x��+asi.•`nkttl'x"�kmNn4hiAn�i�"i1f��71C�S�������:#Y9?�afi�ri�i?1�xty
�k �i�.V�
�-'�•ti�..,��.
&.'r l
I
n-�
�y, FtESOTJJTION OF THE PITKIN CWNTS( BC�I�RD '
i �
i� OF CQ��'ffSSI�',RS IN RESPONSE TO 'IR'IE DRAFP SUPPLII�Nt'AL !
�
�` EIS ON TI� GLE[VWODD CANYON I-70 PF�17E(.'T !
Resolution No. 82-9 �
..`";. .
� Wi�REAS, the United States Azmy Corps of Engineers is soliciting response :% '
__ r. .
to their Draft Supplemental Envimrgnental Impact Statenent on the Glen4n�od Can- �
yon T-70 Project, and 1
S
WHERF.�S, the Pitkin County Carmissioners consider the Glenc.nod Canyon I-70
`� Project to be one which wi11 have severe and long-lasting impacts on state and �
r
local highway conditions, and i
S
WHEREAS, the Gleno�ood Canyon I-70 pmject has been estimated to cost up to f
367.9 million dollars, ten pPSCent of which will be drawn from State Highc�*ay De-
ti� p�artment fu�s, and �
ar,.
�, i �.
Wf�REAS, the State five (5) year Capital Investment Plan proposes that 85.5$ ''
� ;
� of Iiighway Degartment capital expenditures over the next five (5) years be drawn �
� � fmm the State General Fund rather than the Highway Users Trust Fund, thus reduci.ng
the funds available to other State progr�ns aixl services, and
v
y� ; WEIEREAS, Construction on the Glenwood Canyon I-70 project has been scheduled �
�
to extend over at least 8 y�rs during which time traffic oongestion and safety t
ty I�s
hazard on High�,*ay 82 wi11 be incxeased, and ;?
�
__ Wf�F�AS, a modified design for improveme,nt of the Glenwood Canyon highway �;
�
oould result in significant reductions in cost, time ot construction, and environ-
ii .
mental impact while substantially impmving safety conditions: a
��
TFIEF�F'ORE, LEP IT BE FtESOLVED
I. That the Pit�ci.n (bunty Conmissioners urge the Hiqhway CtR¢nission and the �`?
�i
State �epartmPnt of Highways to reconsider a modified two-lane highway �
design for G1enFn�oc1 Canyon that will acoomplish the following:
1. Maximize safety, convenience, traffic flow and aesthetic oonditions.
2. Minimize cost of �nstruction, time of construction, envirorm�ental
itn�act and recreati.onal access loss.
3. Allow for efficient use of Highway Users Trust Fund and othPS Highway
Departrrent monies to maximize re�;r and maintenance of the State High-
waY SYstem.
;
�
_.. __.� ._ .__ __
,� ;'�,`� •
;����;� .
.:
�,�-���i. . , .. .,. �;
�.;••• .cr �•.�;r�,ar �tr`+�>
i . ...�aA�:'.S�':'�1.we�e:,.'l'd��ei:+�.:...ti:Ya.e..�itia'.f �� '.�1'� �'i�8'��BQ���P°�y� �
.�� ;
� a�q.,. , .
� r�,w<�.:
�'� P�;a•'s:{:.;:.
� 9
� �
_ II. That the Pitkin County Oomni.ssioners urge the U.S. Auny Corps of � •
Engineers to deny the Glenwood Canyon I-70 Project 404 Fill Permit a
f
Application on the following grounds:
1. That the public benefit to be gained by construction does not ;;':�;."
�::1 ;
_ - �ustif�• rne publi� cost. :,
2. That alternative designs could result in needed safety impmv�t�xrts
with a significant reduction in financial, envisomnental and social �
S
y� �
�CiW•
Approved by the HoaiYi of (bunty Om[missioners at its regular meeting held on
' FEBRUARY 8 ,19 82
�~ p BOARD OF COUNPY CONA�ffSSIO�RS QF
At'�este: �+i� , PITKIIV COUNPY� COIARADO
* �.``�"�xx� � ,� �� �
a 'c. . �'"�� y.'� � BY: � �
� �t��n's Sc-anlan ��� in Kl en�d �
��Putl' Elerk ai�Recorder Cha' man
j'.c�, R � �l
` CU1.V�t.
f,. :
�_
APPROVF.D AS TO FOId�1:
�!�'yJ LL�G�c�
T f
Sandra M. Stuller
County Attorney
ra '.
� � . . � ' �:,;.�i
�
!
- 2 -
i . �:.
�
,
.rti. .
`�s�-